Variable 2: Gestión del talento humano
3.1 Análisis descriptivo de las variables
The Move
...g7-g5 i n the French Defence
C
millennium and a half. But despite such hess has been in existence for a a venerable age, it is currently experiencing a second youth . The popularity of the game is growing and the number of tournaments is increasing. Views on chess strategy in general, and on opening theory in particular, are rapidly changing.I n recent years systems which previously were considered unpromising , such as the Dutch Defence or the Italian Game, have become fashionable. New trends in open ing theory have appeared . Fifty years ago the Chelyabinsk Variation was simply consid ered an anathema - it was thought that Black's position consisted entirely of weak nesses. And the Volga Gambit? Already in the opening Black sacrifices a pawn, and then dreams about the endgame. Mean while, both of these systems are now very popular. Moreover, White sometimes seeks ways of avoiding them , not allowing them. Great changes are also occurring within opening systems: approaches to them , ways o f playing them , a n d evaluations are changing.
The French Defence is an old love of mine; I have been employing it for more than quarter of a century. Using its example I would like to show what changes are currently occurring in the interpretation of various opening lines.
What are the classical concepts of standard French positions, arising after the advance of the white pawn to e5? Black's plans have always been associated with pressure on the d4-pawn and the development of his initiative on the queenside. Sometimes
Black also plays . . . f7-f6, after which a
struggle begins for the e5-point: White
reinforces his centre and tries to organise an
attack (with pawns or pieces) on the
kingside.
Modern chess has become 'total'; the
struggle in it is conducted by all the pieces
and on any part of the board . And for Black
in the French Defence, nowadays a counter attack on the kingside is an equally custom ary weapon as play on the queenside.
I first encountered the move . . . g7-g5 some
thirty years ago, when analysing the game Sakharov-Petrosian (USSR Champion
ship Semi-Final, Kiev 1 957).
1 e4 2 d4 3 tt:Jc3 4 e5 5 ..lli.d2 6 a3 7 ..txc3 8 'iixd4 9 'iig4?!
9 'it'f4 is more accurate.
9 . . . 1 0 'it'f4 (see diagram) 1 0 . . . 1 1 ..tbS+ 1 2 'ifd2 1 3 ..tb4 1 4 'iie2 e6 dS ..tb4 c5 tt:Je7 ..txc3 cxd4 tt:Jts hS gS! tt:Jc6 d4! �dS! �xg2
The Move . . . g7-g5 in the French Defence
lb
1 93- position after 1 0 'iVf4 - 1 5 'ir'f3 1 6 ltJxf3 1 7 ltJxg5 'ifxf3 �d7 ttJxe5
Black has gained an advantage and he went on to win .
For those times the move . . . g7-g5 looked remarkable and appeared merely to be an exception, in no way disproving the general rule. But I remembered this idea, and I began employing it frequently and not unsuccessfully. Tumenok - Kosikov Kiev 1 977 1 e4 2 d4 3 ltJc3 4 e5 5 a3 6 bxc3 7 a4 French Defence e6 d5 �b4 ltJe7 i.xc3+ c5 ltJbc6
Nowadays in this position I prefer 7 . . . 'Wic7.
8 lDf3 �d7 9 i.d3 1 0 0-0 1 1 i.e2 �c7 c4! f6 1 2 lle1 1 3 �a3 0-0-0
What possible plan does Black have? I n the event of the pawn exchange on f6 he will endeavour to play . . . e6-e5. But if the pawn tension in the centre is maintained, it makes sense to play . . . f6-f5 at some point and then attack on the kingside.
I planned the following piece set-up: switch the rook from d8 to f7, where it will not only assist the attack, but also help in the defence along the 7th rank; place the knight on f5 and support it with . . . h7-h5; play the king to a8 and retreat the bishop to c8, supporting the b 7 -point and vacating the 7th rank for the rook. But in some cases . . . i.d7- e8-g6(h5) is also possible.
With what should Black begin?
1 3 . . . �df8!
The correct move. Now nothing is given by 1 4 i.d6? ! 'ir'd8, when after . . . l::i.f7 and . . . ltJf5 the bishop comes u nder attack. Apparently White does best to play 1 4 i.f1 .l:i.f7 1 5 g3!, intending after the exchange of pawns to bring out the bishop to h3 (Duebaii-Fichtl , Bamberg 1 972).
1 4 a5 15 a6?
.l:i.f7
the queenside is to Black's advantage. I n addition , the a6-pawn may subsequently become weak. 15 . . . 1 6 �d6 1 7 liJh4 b6 ii'd8
White prevents 1 7 .. . l2lf5 and prepares f2-f4.
1 7 . . . f5!
Black's flank attack may be successful only if the centre is stable. The hasty 1 7 .. . g5? is a mistake in view of 1 8 exf6 .
1 8 f4
1 8 . .. g5!
A typical pawn sacrifice for the sake of opening lines - a kind of 'Volga Gambit' in the French Defence.
19 fxg5 20 "i!Vd2 21 l2lf3 22 gxh6 "i!Vg8 .l::!.g7 h6 �g6!
22 . . . .l::!.xg2+ would have been a blunder, since after 23 �h 1 followed by 24 1'1g 1 the initiative on the kingside is seized by White he simply has more pieces there.
23 �f1 1'1hxh6 24 1:1eb1
Now Black has to reckon with the rook sacrifice on b6, say, in reply to 24 . . . �e8?.
24 . . . Wd8!
Before the start of a decisive assault it is useful to safeguard one's own king . Now 25
l:txb6 axb6 26 a7 l2lxa7 27 l:txa7 l2lc8 is no longer dangerous. White should probably have set up a defensive line by ii'f2, l:i.e1 , l:tad 1 and .l:i.d2 .
25 'ii'c1 ?
White has practically no chance of creating an attack, and nevertheless he aims for one. This is the d ifference between obstinacy and tenacity!
Let's outline a plan of action for Black. It is important for him to advance his pawn to f4
(after first playing . . . l:!.g4 ). I n this case the
pressu re on g2 is intensified , and the f5-
square is vacated for the knight and the b 1 - h7 diagonal for t h e bishop or queen. But first he must eliminate Wh ite's hopes associated with the rook sacrifice on b6.
When the plan is clear, the subsequent moves are easy to make.
25 . . . 26 �a3 27 "i!Ve3 28 Si..c1 29 "i!Vf2 30 �e2 tt:Jc8! �e8 l:th8 l2lce7 l:!.g4 .1l.h5
30 .. .f4 31 l2le 1 was premature.
31 lZ'ld2
When defending it is in general recom mended to exchange pieces. However, the exchange of the light-square bishops does not bring White any relief.
31 . . . .l::!.g7 32 i.xh5 33 lZ'lf3 34 �d2 35 l:!.e1 Th reatening 36 . . . i¥xc2 . 36 l:!.ac1 37 Wf1 ?! 1'1xh5 �g4! f4 �h7 l2lf5
The Move . . . g7-g5 in the French Defence
ctJ
1 95Note the great activity of the black pieces. The accumulation of positional advantages usually prepares the ground for a decisive combinative breakthroug h . And here such an appropriate moment has in fact a rrived !
37 . . . .l:!xh2! 38 lDxh2 ltJg3+ 39 ii'xg3
Forced : 39 'it>g 1 iixh2+! leads to mate.
39 . . . l:l.xg3 40 'it>g1 'ii'g6 41 i.xf4 .l:i.xg2+ 42 'it>f1 l:.g1 + 43 'it>f2 ii'g2+
After 44 We3 the knight, which all the game has been standing in ambush, lands the concluding blow: 44 . . . ltJe7! 45 l:l.xg 1 lDf5 mate. White resigned .
Today in the French Defence Black ad vances his pawn to g5 in the most varied situations. Here is one more example.
1 e4 2 d4 Smagin - Vaiser Barnaul 1 984 French Defence e6 d5 3 ltJd2 lDf6 lDfd7 4 e5 5 i.d3 c5 6 c3 ltJc6 7 lDe2 cxd4 8 cxd4 f6 9 exf6 lDxf6 1 0 lDf3 i.d6 1 1 0-0 'ii'c7 1 2 ltJc3 a6 1 3 i.g5 0-0 1 4 i.h4 lDh5!
There is a struggle in progress for the central d4- and e5-points. White wanted to exchange the dark-square bishops, whereas for Black it is advantageous to give up his knight for the enemy bishop.
15 i.g3?!
Wh ite should not have fallen in with his opponent's plans. 1 5 l:i.e 1 was stronger, and subsequently even �h4-g5-e3, in o rder to support the weak d4-pawn.
1 5 . . . ltJxg3 1 6 hxg3 g6!
The g7 -square must be vacated for the queen ; from there it intensifies the attack o n the key d4- a n d e5-squares. Black's positio n is already preferable.
17 .l:!.c1 'ii'g7 18 i.b1
This is not an attack on the king. By threatening the f3-knight, Black further in tensifies the pressure on the enemy centre.
1 9 Ite1 .Jtd7
There is no need to hurry: the complications after 1 9 .. . g4 20 lbe5 ..txe5?! 21 dxe5 lLlxe5 22 lLlxd5! exd5 23 �xd5+ lbf7 24 .l:!.c7 favour White.
20 'ii'd2?
20 'it'd3 was better. There now follows an exchange sacrifice, typical in such posi tions. 20 . . . 21 gxf3 22 cJi>g2 .l:!.xf3! lLlxd4
If 22 l:te3, then 22 . . . ..tf4! is strong.
22 . . . .l:!.f8 23 .l:!.h1 24 'ii'd1 25 lLlxd5!? h6 lLlxf3
Who has outwitted whom? 25 . . . exd5? 26 it'xd5+ 'ii'f7 is incorrect in view of 27 i.e4 ! , when i t is now Black who h a s problems. And if 25 .. . .Jtc6? there follows simply 26 �xc6! bxc6 27 lLle3 .
25 . . . lLlh4+ ! !
Nevertheless the move . . . g6-g5 also comes in useful for the attack.
26 gxh4
If 26 'lt>g 1 , then 26 .. .'i!tf7! is strong, attacking
the f2-point and intending 27 .. . lLlf3+ and 28 .. . exd5. 26 . . . 27 cJi>f1 28 c.t>e1 gxh4+ .Jtb5+
Here 28 . . .'it'g2! would have won immedi
ately. Black played less accurately (28 . . .
Si.b4+ ), but all the same he soon won .
And now I would like to reveal to you the
story of how I conceived a new opening idea , which in the mid-1 980s became very
popular. You will see from within the
mechanism of how an opening novelty
emerges.
When studying the Tarrasch Variation of the
French Defence, on one occasion I was
considering how Black should play after the
following moves: 1 e4 e6 2 d4 d5 3 lLld2 lbf6 4 e5 5 f4 6 c3 7 lLldf3 lLlfd7 c5 lLlc6
The Move . . . g7--g5 in the French Defence
ttJ
1 97A 'prompt' was found in a game which made In order to emphasise the vulnerability of the an enormous impression on me. white king , Vaganian blows up the central fortifications with the aid of material sacri-
Reshevsky - Vaganian Skopje 1 976 7 . . . 'ii'a5 8 �2 il..e7 9 il..d3 'ii'b6 1 0 tLle2 f6 1 1 exf6
In an earlier game Adorjan-Vaganian (Tees side 1 97 4) White chose 1 1 'lt>g3 (intending h2-h3 and 'it>h2). But this did not lead to a quiet life: Rafael Vaganian replied 1 1 . . . g5!? 12 �e 1 cxd4 1 3 tt:Jexd4 ( 1 3 cxd4 gxf4+ 1 4 tt:Jxf4 fxe5 1 5 dxe5 tLlc5) 1 3 .. . gxf4+ 1 4 il..xf4 fxe5 1 5 tt:Jxe5 tLldxe5 1 6 .l:!.xe5 (Black also has an excellent position after 1 6 il.xe5 tt:Jxe5 1 7 �xe5 il.d7 1 8 'iVh5+ 'it>d8) 16 . . . tt:Jxe5 1 7 il..xe5 �g8+ 1 8 'i.t>h3 �g5, and in a sharp skirmish he finally won .
1 1 . . . il.xf6 1 2 'it>g3 cxd4 1 3 cxd4 0-0 1 4 l:re1 ?
The decisive mistake. 1 4 h3 followed by 'it>h2 was essential.
1 4 . . . e5! ! fices. 1 5 fxe5 1 6 dxe5 1 7 'it>xh4 tLldxe5! il..h4+ ! ! �xf3 ! !
Now 1 8 gxf3 'iVf2+ leads t o a quick mate.
1 8 �f1 'ili'b4+ 1 9 il.f4 'i!t'e7+ 20 il.g5 'ii'e6! 21 il.f5 l:txf5 22 tLlf4 'i¥xe5 23 'ii'g4 l:tf7 24 ifh5 tLle7 25 g4 tLlg6+ 26'it>g3 il.d7 27 �ae1 'ikd6 28 il..h6 .U.af8
White resigned.
This brilliant rout suggested to me the main idea by which Black should be guided , in order to exploit his lead in development: he must detain the enemy king in the centre, and then blow up the centre at any cost. But in the game Panchenko-Kosikov (Dne propetrovsk 1 978) my opponent replied to 7 . . :�a5 with 8 dxc5! 'iVxc5 (of course, 8 . . . il..xc5? 9 b4 is bad) 9 tLlh3 followed by tLlf2-d3 . White gained an advantage and he went on to win.
White also has another excellent set-up: 8 il..e3! cxd4 (8 . . . b5 9 dxc5! b4 does not work because of 1 0 tLld4 il.b 7 1 1 a3! bxc3 1 2 b4: Tseshkovsky-Vagania n , Vilnius 1 975) 9 tLlxd4 tLlxd4 1 0 il.xd4.
In the search for an improvement in Black's play, a logical thought occurred: why place the queen on a5, if all the same it later returns to b6?
7 . . . 'i¥b6!?
through opening books. The theory of that time stated that White gains an advantage.
8 g3 cxd4 9 cxd4
After 9 ltJxd4 ltJc5 followed by . . . ltJe4 and . . . f7-f6 Black gains counterplay.
9 . . . �b4+ 1 0 'iii>f2 f6
1 1 '>t>g2
If now 1 1 . . . 0-0 , then 1 2 �d3 followed by ltJe2 and h2-h4.
I focussed on this position for a long time. Black has a strange clump of pieces on the queenside ('iVb6 , ltJd?, �c8, .Ua8) - they seriously hinder their mutual development. Of course, it is possible to play 1 1 . . . 'iVc7, intending . . . ltJb6, . . . �d? and . . . 0-0-0, but during this time White will also complete his development, and his spatial superiority will leave its mark on the entire subsequent play. But let's approach the situation from the other side. At least Black has developed four pieces, whereas the opponent has devel oped only one knight, which in add ition is depriving the other knight of its best square f3. It is also Black to move. He has a significant lead in development. As is well known , in closed positions this is not too important a factor. Hence Black must open
up the game, by removing the barrier of pawns.
It was this that gave birth to an idea , which at first sight seemed crazy: 1 1 . . . g5!?. Nearly all Black's forces are grouped together on the queenside, and yet he launches tactical operations on the kingside, where the opponent has more pieces. Anti-positional? Not altogether since, as we have already mentioned , Black is better developed and it is very important for him to open lines. In addition , the white king is sheltering on the kingside. ·
I n February 1 980 the Premier League of the USSR Championship was held in Vilnius. I
was there for several days and one evening I showed my idea to Gennady Kuzmin, a grandmaster with a very unusual way of th inking. Nevertheless, his verdict was un ambiguous: 'This cannot be, because it can never be. ' True, he was not able to demon strate anything with variations.
I n the summer of 1 98 1 , also in Vilnius, the All-U nion Schoolchildren's Spartakiad was held . Appearing for the U kraine team was one of my pupils, 1 3-year-old Lena Sedina. I n an important match against the Moscow team, with the agreement of the trainers the novelty was put into action for the first time. The experiment proved successful . Without going into details, I will show the opening stage. Saburova - Sedina Vilnius 1 98 1 1 1 . . . g5!? 12 exf6 g4 1 3 f7+! '>t>f8! 1 4ltJe5
If 1 4 ltJg5 Black was intending 1 4 .. . ltJf6 with the threat of 1 5 .. . h6.
14 . . . 1 5 ii'xd4
ii'xd4 ltJxd4
The Move . . . g7-g5 in the French Defence
l2J
1 99 1 6 tt:Jxg4 r#;;xfl 1 7 l'L'lf3 tt:Jxf3 1 8 r#;;xf3 b6! 1 9 �b5 .ii.b7 20 .l:!.d1 We7 21 �xd7 ..t>xd7 22 �d2 �d6Black has achieved a good position , and in the end she went on to win the game. Of course, one does not have to be a g randmaster to realise that at some point Black's position was rather dangerous. Thus, for example, instead of 14 tt:Je5 White should nevertheless have considered 1 4
t2lg5 l'L'lf6 , and now 1 5 h 3 ! .
I did not want t o expose t h e k i n g too much, and so new searches for an improvement to Black's play were sought. I n the end I was able to find another way of implementing the same idea . It turns out that the g-pawn can also be advanced a move earlier: 1 1 ... g5!.
I showed my new idea to an old friend of mine, the Ternopolsk master Leonid Kaplu n , and with m y agreement he employed i t in the autumn of 1 983. Polyantsev - Kaplun U krainian Spartakiad 1 983 1 0 . . . g5! 11 fxg5 tt:Jdxe5 1 2 tt:Jxe5 tt:Jxe5 1 3 'i!tg2 tt:Jc6 1 4 l'L'lf3 �f8 ! 1 5 b3 .ii.g7 16 �b2 �d7 1 7 .tr.c1 1 8 gxh6 1 9 �e2?
1 9 tt:Je5 was better
1 9 . . .
h6! llxh6
0-0-0
[ 1 9 .. . e5! with the threat of 20 ... �h3+ was
very strong -Dvoretsky.]
20 tt:Je5 21 'it'd2 22 �f3 23 tt:Jxc6+ �e8 'itb8 f6 �xc6
Black has ach ieved a positional advantage and later he successfully converted it. But it was not in this game that my novelty was first tested in practice. A few months earlier it had been employed by Lena Sed ina.
Voronova - Sedina
Women's USSR Championship Semi-Final 1 983
1 0 . . . 1 1 .ii.e3
g5! f6
With this move order the undermining move gains in strength , although 1 1 .. . g4 also
came into consideration .
1 2 �h3 13 �xe6
h5!
[It is curious that the Encyclopaedia of Chess Openings recommends 13 exf6 g4 14 f7+ 'ittfB 1 5 l'L'lh4 with the evaluation 'advantage for White '. Although in fact after 1 5 .. . gxh3