1.d4 d5 2.c4 e6 3.Nc3 Nf6 4.Bg5 c5!?
A move seen in first world-title match, Zukertort - Steinitz (USA, 1886). After more than half a
century it was considered that Black's allowing the opponent to spoil
Black's kingside pawns (5.cxd5 exd5 6. Bxf6 gxf6 7.e3) gave Black an
unpromising position. However in the middle of the XXth Century
interesting gambit opportunities for Black were found, and the move
4...c5 for some time became very popular.
5.cxd5
The basic and strongest continuation. It is
impossible to recommend for White 5.dxc5?! Bxc5 6.cxd5 Qb6! (only
not 6...Bxf2+? 7.Kxf2 Ng4+ 8.Kg3! Qxg5 9.Qa4+ Bd7 10.Qxg4+) 7.e3
Nxd5
.
In case of 5.Nf3 cxd4
Black destroys the opponent's center and in the further attack the
advanced White pieces receive a full game. And on
6.Nxd4 the best reply is (If 6.Qxd4
there follows 6...Nc6 7.Bxf6 (or 7.Qh4 Be7
8.0-0-0 Qa5 9.e3 Bd7 10.Kb1 h6! 11.cxd5 exd5 12.Nd4 0-0
As it was in well-known game Pillsbury-Em. Lasker, St.
Petersburg 1895/96 - White's King turned out to be not too
reliably covered on the queenside and with Black's lead in
development he unleashed a
prompt attack: 13.Bxf6 Bxf6 14.Qh5 Nxd4 15.exd4 Be6 16.f4 Rac8 17.f5
Rxc3! 18.fxe6 Ra3!! -+) 7...gxf6 (not good 7...Nxd4?! 8.Bxd8
Nc2+ 9.Kd2 Nxa1 10.Bh4 Bd6 11.e3± - the knight on a1 will soon be
lost, and White will retain a material advantage.) 8.Qh4 dxc4
9.Rd1 Bd7 10.e3 To this position there arrived another game,
Pillsbury-Em. Lasker (Cambridge Springs 1904). Instead of
the text Lasker varied with 10... Ne5?! 11. Nxe5 fxe5 12. Qxc4 Qb6 13. Be2 Qxb2
14.0-0 with White advantage. Black had some good opportunities.
In particular, Lasker's recommendation 10...f5!? (not bad looking also
is Euwe's suggestion 10...Be7!? 11.Bxc4 Qa5 12.0-0 f5 13.Qf4 0-0-0
with counter-play.
…Rhg8-g6) 11.Qxc4 (or 11.Qg3 h5 12.Bxc4 h4 13.Qf4 Rg8 14.Ne5 Nxe5
15.Qxe5 Bg7
Kasparov) 11...Bg7 12.Qb3 Qe7!? 13.Be2 Na5 14.Qc2 0-0,
Black's King is in safety and two bishops supervise the basic
central squares.; 6...e5! The knight
has some retreats but none of them allow White to expect to win
material. More likely they need to think of maintenance of
equality. 7.Nf3 The best move in
the given position has been applied by Euwe in a match with Alekhine
in 1937.
a) 7.Ndb5 a6! Black plays simply, specifically and
strongly. 8.Qa4 (In a children's trap: 8.Nxd5? axb5 9.Nxf6+
Qxf6! -+ got White in the game Fine-Judovich (Moscow 1937). The
most interesting, that Fine had further followers, in particular
grandmaster Kouatly...; White stands worse also after 8.Bxf6?!
gxf6 9.Na3 d4 10.Nd5 Be6 11.Qa4+ Nd7 12.e4 f5)
8...Bd7 What now can White play?
There remains only 9.cxd5
a1) It's impossible
to play 9.Nxd5?
Bxb5 10.cxb5 (10.Nxf6+ Qxf6; 10.Bxf6 Bxa4 11.Bxd8 Kxd8)
10...Qxd5 11.bxa6+ b5-+ - in all variants White remains without a
piece;
a2) In case of 9.Bxf6 gxf6 and the capture on d5 still does
not succeed because of Bxb5! For example: 10.cxd5 (White is forced
to play 10.e3, and after 10...d4!? (not so clear 10...dxc4
11.Rd1) 11.exd4 exd4 12.Ne4 Bc6 his knights suddenly "hang on".
So, after a natural 13.Bd3 f5 14.Ng3 b6!-+ the knight on b5 simply gets
lost) 10...Bxb5 11.Nxb5 axb5! 12.Qxa8 Bb4+ 13.Kd1 Qxd5+ 14.Kc2 0-0-+
and Black mates;
a3) On 9.e4 strong is 9...Nc6! Further it is possible:
10.Nxd5 axb5 11.Qxa8 Bb4+ 12.Kd1 Qxa8 13.Nc7+ Ke7 14.Nxa8 Rxa8
15.cxb5 Nd4
and Black has an evident advantage.
The sacrifice of
the exchange is rather perspective also: 9...Bxb5!?
a1) Nejshtadt's
recommendation 9...Bc5 appears unsuccessful - the threat Ra7 is
imaginary. White easily plays 10.e3! and on 10...Ra7? he has a simple
reply in 11.Qc4 with advantage.;
a2) Much more strongly 9...Qb6! - here
already White is obliged to be concerned with the threat of ...Ra7. After
10.Be3 (10.Bxf6? gxf6 11.e3 Ra7!-+) 10...Bxb5 (but not
10...Bc5? 11.Bxc5 Qxc5 12.Qc4! - the queen safely escapes from a
bunch) 11.Bxb6 Bxa4 12.Nxa4 Bb4+ 13.Nc3 Nxd5 14.Bc5 Bxc3+ 15.bxc3
Nxc3 There is an ending in which White has two bishops but the
compensation for a pawn is nevertheless insufficient.
10.Nxb5 axb5 11.Qxa8 Bb4+ 12.Bd2 Bxd2+ 13.Kxd2 Qxd5+ 14.Ke1 0-0 -
White will find it difficult to coordinate his pieces and his king has got
stuck in the center for a long time.;
b) 7.Nc2 Here the knight is located passively and
does not render pressure upon the center. After
7...d4 8.Nd5 Be7 (not bad also is 8...Bf5 9.f3 Bxc2 10.Qxc2 Be7=)
9.Nxe7 Qxe7 10.e3 dxe3
11.fxe3 (11.Nxe3? Qb4+) 11...0-0 Black has a full game;
c) White
can preliminary exchange on f6, but the estimation of the position
hardly will change: 7.Bxf6 gxf6 8.Nc2 d4 9.Nd5 Be6 10.e4 Now it is
best for Black to attack White's center at once:
10...f5!?
(it's possible also to play 10...Na6 11.Bd3 Rg8 12.0-0 f5 with a
complicated game, Van Scheltinga-Book, Helsinki 1952)
11.Bd3 Bxd5
12.cxd5 Qa5+ 13.Qd2 Qxd2+ 14.Kxd2 Bh6+ 15.Ke2 fxe4 16.Bxe4 Nd7 Pawn
d5 more likely weakness, than force, and the knight on c2 it is
obvious not on a place (Foltys-Stahlberg, Lodz 1938);
7...d4 8.Nd5
Analysis: Position After 8.Nd5
Euwe tried for Black 8...Be6 but in this case by way
of:
a) Now at
his desire Black can begin to repeat the
moves - 8...Qa5+ 9.Bd2 Qd8 because it's impossible for White to play 10.Nxe5 Nxd5
11.Qa4+ Nc6 12.Nxc6 since 12...Nb6!;
b) Alekhine played 8...Nc6 but after 9.e4 Be7 10.Bxf6! It is
important for White to keep a strong knight on d5. 10...Bxf6 11.b4
0-0 12.Bd3 a5 13.a3 Be6 14.Rb1 Euwe has the initiative
in this position (Euwe-Alekhine, Netherlands 1937, 4th game of the match);
c) Stronger for Black 8...Be7 compelling White to determine
destiny of the knight on d5 at once. 9.Bxf6 (or 9.Nxe7 Qxe7 10.e3
dxe3 11.Bxe3 0-0 12.Qc2 Bg4 13.Be2 Nc6 14.0-0 Rfe8= and Black is
okay) 9...Bxf6 10.e4 dxe3 as well as 11.Nxe3 (Now in case of
11.fxe3 e4! 12.Nd4 (on 12.Nd2 it's possible simply to take a pawn
- 12...Bxb2 13.Rb1 Be5 14.Nxe4 0-0) 12...0-0 13.Be2 Nc6;
11...Qxd1+ 12.Rxd1 e4 13.Nd4 (or 13.Nd2 0-0 14.Nd5 Bd8∞) 13...Nc6
14.Nb5 0-0 15.Rd2 Be5 = and Black's position at least is not worse.
9.Qa4+! (nothing gives 9.e4 Bxd5 10.cxd5 Bb4+ 11.Bd2 Bxd2+ 12.Nxd2
0-0=) 9...Bd7 (Doubtfully 9...Nc6?! 10.Nxe5 Bxd5 11.cxd5 Qxd5
12.Bxf6 gxf6 13.Nxc6 bxc6 14.0-0-0±) 10.Qb3 Bd6 11.Bxf6 gxf6 12.e3
White obtain advantage;
On 5.e3 Black also can
exchange on d4 - 5...cxd4 And after
6.exd4 (In case of 6.Qxd4 Nc6 7.Qd2 (7.Bxf6 gxf6 8.Qh4 dxc4 9.Bxc4
Be7=) At his disposal there is an interesting sacrifice of a pawn:
7...Be7!? 8.Bxf6 Bxf6 9.cxd5 exd5 10.Nxd5 Bxb2!? 11.Qxb2 Qxd5
12.Qxg7 Qa5+ 13.Ke2 Rf8 with further Be6 (or Bf5) and 0-0-0.;
6...Be7 There arises a position,
by transposition, from the Caro-Cann Defence (1.e4 c6 2.d4 d5 3.exd5 cxd5 4.c4 Nf6
5.Nc3 e6 6.Bg5 Be7) in which White has made a premature attack with the
bishop on g5 (in Caro-Cann usually play 6.Nf3). This circumstance
does not allow him to expect for much - eventually
Black will play Nf6-d5, he will be forced to exchange the dark colored bishop (or to retreat it back), then Black will have no
problems. Here are possible continuations:
7.Nf3 0-0 8.Bd3 dxc4 (8...Nc6 9.0-0 Nb4
10.Be2 dxc4 11.Bxc4 b6 12.a3 Ba6 13.Bxa6 Nxa6 14.Qa4 Nc7 15.Ne5 Qe8
16.Nc6 Nfd5 17.Bd2 Nxc3 18.Nxe7+ Kh8 ½-½, Petursson-Finegold (Saint John 1988))
9.Bxc4 a6 10.0-0 b5 11.Bd3 (11.Bb3 Bb7
12.Re1 Nc6 13.a3 Rc8 14.Bc2 b4 15.Qd3 bxc3 16.Bxf6 g6 17.Bxe7 Nxe7
18.bxc3 Bxf3 19.Qxf3 Nd5 20.Be4 Rxc3 Plachetka-Inkiov,
Copenhagen 1990) 11...Bb7 12.Qe2 Nc6 13.Rad1 Nb4 14.Bb1 Nbd5 15.Ne4
Nxe4 16.Qxe4 g6 17.h4 Ra7 18.Qg4 Nf6 19.Qf4 Nh5 20.Qe3 Bxf3 Polgar
Zsu-Inkiov, Stara Zagora 1990.
5...cxd4
Just this sharp continuation, developed by Dutch
masters L. Prince and T. van Shelting, it is accepted to call "the
Dutch gambit." The idea of the move 5... cxd4 is to change the
situation on the board by the sacrifice of a pawn, to outstrip the
opponent in development and to try to proceed from defensive actions
to offensive ones already at an early stage of the game.
Another
gambit possibility, 5...Qb6 (the Peruvian variant), is insufficient
to gain a counterplay; it's proved that 6.Bxf6 Qxb2 7.Rc1 gxf6 8.e3!
leads to a clear White advantage.
The basic variant 6.Qxd4 is
examined later, first we shall study the less popular...
6.Qa4+
In practice, when the opponent, having faced the
unexpected in an opening, one rather frequently sees him try to turn aside from the main
continuations. Here such a method can not be recommended.
6...Nbd7!?
An arrogant answer. To a more simple game leads
6...Qd7
7.Qxd4 (Erroneous is 7.dxe6? Qxa4 8.exf7+ Kxf7 9.Nxa4 b5-+ - White
lose a knight; or in case of 7.Qxd7+ Nbxd7 8.dxe6 fxe6 9.Nb5 Bb4+
10.Bd2 Bxd2+ 11.Kxd2 0-0
Black has excellent perspectives.) 7...Nc6
The hope to obtain something by way of 8.Qa4
has no foundation. (Here White has to play accurately to not
receive worse: 8.Qd2 Nxd5 9.a3!? (9.Nxd5 Qxd5! 10.Qxd5 exd5 11.Nf3
d4! Pachman-Prins,
Czechoslovakia 1949) 9...Nxc3 10.Qxc3 Qd4 11.Bd2 Qxc3 12.Bxc3 e5
13.g3 f6= Christiansen-Sarapu, Wellington 1988;
8...Nxd5 9.0-0-0 Be7
More reliable continuation (Dangerous and not quite playable is 9...Nxc3!? 10.bxc3 Bd6 11.e4 (or 11.c4 Qc7 12.c5 Be7) Black has a simple reply 11...0-0! and does not pass 12.e5? Nxe5
13.Qxd7 Ba3+ 14.Kc2 Nxd7-+; 10.Bd2 (if 10.Bxe7 then 10...Nxc3
11.bxc3 Qxe7 - White's position on the queenside is compromised.)
10...0-0 11.Nf3 Qc7!? (Full equality
follows 11...Rd8 12.e4 Nxc3
13.Bxc3 Qxd1+ 14.Qxd1 Rxd1+ 15.Kxd1= G.Steiner-Veid, Venice 1950)
12.e4 Nb6 13.Qb3 Black has appreciably better chances for creation of
attack on the enemy king. 13...a6!? (13...Na5 14.Qc2 Nac4 15.Na4!=)
14.Kb1 Nd7 15.a3 b5 16.Na2 Bb7 17.Rc1 Rac8, Calvo-Chekhov
(Algarve 1975) and Black seized the initiative.
7.Qxd4
It seems White could
damage his opponent's structure but after 7.Bxf6 Qxf6! 8.Nb5 Black has a
witty move - 8...Nb6!! Black isn't afraid of a double check! It
appears to lead to a White loss. 9.Qxd4
a) For example 9.Nc7+ Kd8 10.Qe8+ Kxc7 11.Rc1+ Kb8 12.d6 Qf4-+;
b) Or
9.Nd6+ Kd8 10.Qe8+ Kc7 11.Nb5+ (b)11.Rc1+ Kxd6 12.Rc6+ bxc6 13.Qxc6+
Ke7 14.d6+ Kd8 15.Qc7+ Ke8-+) 11...Kb8 12.d6 g6-+ Black's King has
avoided danger and has disappeared, meanwhile threatens Bd6 with a
prize of a queen.;
9...Qxd4 10.Nxd4 Bb4+ 11.Kd1 Nxd5 12.e4 Nf6
13.Bd3 Bc5 14.Nb5 0-0 15.f3 Rd8 Two bishops and the best
development provide Black's advantage in the ending (Solozhenkin-S.Ivanov,
Leningrad 1991.)
Note that if White plays 7.Nb5 without the preliminary
exchange on f6 Black cannot allow a double check any more. Correct
is 7...Qb6! Also possible: (7...Nb6? 8.Nc7+ Ke7 9.d6+! Kxd6
(9...Qxd6?? 10.Qe8# A rare picture on beauty!) 10.Qxd4+ Ke7
(10...Kxc7 11.Rc1+) 11.Qe5+-; 8.Bxf6 gxf6 9.Rc1 Bc5 10.b4 Bd6 11.Nf3
0-0 Despite the weakened pawn structure, the backwardness of the
opponent's kingside allows us to estimate Black's prospects as rather
quite good.
7...Bc5
Attacking White's queen, Black wins the
important race for development.
8.Qd2 Qb6
In reply ton 8...exd5
White plays 9.e3 and having finished the development can expect for
insignificant opening advantage (only not 9.Nxd5? Bxf2+!);
Also seen is the sharp 8...h6 9.Be3 Bb4 10.dxe6 fxe6
11.Qc2 0-0, equal but unclear, Rendboe-Blauert, Lyngby 1989.
9.e3 Nxd5
For Black it is
important to take on d5 with a knight - in case of the exchange of
knights White's queenside remains without cover. In the game Kouatly-Weidemann (Innsbruck 1977) Black wanted to win at once, and
here what has turned out from this: 9...Bb4 10.dxe6 Ne4? 11.exf7+
Kf8 12.Be7+!! An effective refutation! 12...Bxe7 (The rest is also
bad 12...Kxe7 13.Nd5+ Ke6 14.Qxb4 Kxd5 15.0-0-0+ Ke5 16.Nf3+ Kf5
17.Rd5++-; 12...Kxf7 13.Qd5+ Kxe7 14.Qxe4++-) 13.Nxe4 Nf6 14.Nc3 Bf5
15.Bc4 Rc8 16.Bb3 Ne4 17.Qd5 Qg6 18.Nh3 Bd6 19.Kf1 White has beaten
off the attack and realized a material advantage.
10.Na4
Also in
case of 10.Nxd5 exd5 11.a3 d4 the initiative is on Black's side.
10...Qb4 11.Nxc5 Qxd2+ 12.Kxd2 Nxc5
Despite the presence of the two
bishops, the position of the white king on d2 it is rather dangerous. Black's chances are
better. In the game Zpevak-Repkova (Slovakia
2004) there followed:
13.f3 f6 14.Bh4 0-0 15.e4 Nb4 16.Bf2 Rd8+ 17.Kc3
Nbd3
The initiative is on the Black's side.
Development of
modern opening theory in many respects is determined by a well-known
phenomenon: chess fashion. And it is quite clear: when elite
grandmasters constantly play those or other opening schemes, then
willy-nilly many other players start to follow. At the same time chess is very many-sided; in it there are a huge quantity of opening variants
and gambits which for this or that reason are in the boondocks of modern
theory,
though their objective estimation frequently does not correspond to the stereotypes
which have developed for decades. To one such, the most interesting
variant - the Dutch Gambit in the Queen's Gambit Declined, the present
article is devoted.
