El proceso de optimización sintáctica de consultas

with his pinned knight; for example, after g5 ( or 24...a3 25.a1! ) 25.h4 h6 26.hxg5 hxg5 27.c5 . ]

24.b5 c5

[ Other ways of meeting the minority attack are worse:

24...cxb5 25.xb5 xb5 26.xb5 and Black can’t avoid losing a pawn. ]

[ 24...ac8 25.bxc6 xb2 26.xb2 bxc6 27.c5 and White has a clear advantage, as

a4 and c6 are clear targets. ]

25.a3!? White plays it the safe way and I like it.

[ Rybka prefers 25.e5 b4 26.e7 xa2 27.xc5 , but after e8 28.c7 xc7 29.xc7 ac8! , all the queenside pawns

will be exchanged (for example, 30.xb7 c3 31.a1 b8 32.a3 xb7 33.xb7 xb5 34.xa4 ), making White’s task of

converting his extra pawn very difficult. ] 25...d7 26.c4 c7?

[ Black should prefer 26...c7 with a still defensible position, though White maintains the initiative after 27.e5 e6 28.d5 . ] 27.b6 d6 28.b5 It is instructive to see

how White keeps making progress, while Black is simply unable to generate counterplay.

Now the c5-pawn falls, together with Black’s resistance. ad8 29.xc5 With an extra pawn and a strong bishop, the rest is easy for White. f6 30.d4 e7 31.xb7!

The plan begun with 17 Rab1! has been successful and the passed b6-pawn is now decisive. xd4 32.exd4 f5 33.g2 xd4 34.b7 g7 35.b8 e2+ 36.h2

. A fine technical display by Romanishin.

1-0

Back to Contents Page Chapter Six

The King’s Indian: ...Nbd7 and ...e5

The ...Nbd7 and ...e7-e5 system represents the King’s Indian in its purest form. In contrast to White’s desire to keep the game positional, Black wants to play dynamically and tactically. Lemos-Bitalzadeh and Akopian-Avrukh are good examples of this theme. In my opinion, Black has a short-term initiative by initiating early central tension. On the other hand, White has the long-term positional advantage, enhanced by his solid structure.

Black can also try playing the Gallagher Variation with ...a6/...Rb8/...c5 in order to obtain counterplay on the queenside with ...b5, as in Tregubov-Mamedov. If he plays in the Old Indian Defence fashion with ...c6/...a6/...b5, as in Dautov-Sutovsky, I think that 11 c5! confers White a big edge, as it triggers the collapse of Black’s centre.

You should study the game motifs carefully, as it is much easier to play when you know the ideas beforehand, rather than find the moves over the board with time constraints.

Finally, in the remaining four games (L’Ami-Hendricks, Bradford-Bonin, etc), the ...Qa5/...exd4/...Ne5 line is

discussed. This system requires some accuracy by White, since we have to play Bf1, usually leaving the f3-square unprotected. Nevertheless, White has a lot of resources to handle Black’s threats and I believe that, once again, White’s bishop pair is good enough for an advantage.

Game 37

D.Lemos A.Bitalzadeh, Palau 2009 Game 38

V.Akopian-B.Avrukh, Amsterdam 2005 Game 39

R.Vaganian-R.Polzin, German League 2003 Game 40

Kir.Georgiev-Z.Ilincic, Boskovic Memorial, Belgrade 2000 Game 41

V.Topalov-M.Apicella, Yerevan Olympiad 1996 Game 42

P.Tregubov-R.Mamedov, Dubai 2002 Game 43

S.Lputian-M.Krasenkow, FIDE World Championship, Moscow 2001 Game 44

R.Dautov-E.Sutovsky, Bad Homburg 1997 Game 45

A.Karpov-J.Lautier, Biel 1990 Game 46

E.L’Ami-W.Hendriks, Hoogeveen 2010 Game 47

J.Bradford-J.Bonin, US Championship, Stillwater 2007 Game 48

V.Ivanchuk-T.Radjabov, Nice (blindfold rapid) 2009

V.Ivanchuk-T.Radjabov, Nice (blindfold rapid) 2009 Game 49

R.Dautov-V.Georgiev, European Team Championship, Batumi 1999

Index of Variations

1 d4 Nf6 2 c4 g6 3 g3 Bg7 4 Bg2 0-0 5 Nf3 d6 6 0-0 Nbd7 7 Nc3 e5 8 h3 c6 8...a6 9 dxe5 – Vaganian-Polzin

8...exd4 9 Nxd4 Nb6 10 b3 10...c5 – Lemos-Bitalzadeh 10...d5 – Akopian-Avrukh 8...Re8 9 e4 exd4 10 Nxd4

10...c6 – 8...c6

10...a6 – Tregubov-Mamedov 10...Nc5 11 Re1

11...a5 – Georgiev-Ilincic 11...Bd7 – Topalov-Apicella 9 e4 Qa5

9...exd4 10 Nxd4 Re8 – Lputian-Krasenkow 9...a6 – Dautov-Sutovsky

9...Qb6 – Karpov-Lautier

10 Re1 exd4 11 Nxd4 Ne5 12 Bf1 Re8 12...Be6 13 Nxe6 fxe6

14 Kg2 – L’Ami-Hendriks 14 Be3 – Bradford-Bonin 13 Be3

13...Be6 – Ivanchuk-Radjabov 13...c5 – Dautov-Georgiev

Back to Contents Page

E67 Lemos,D

Bitalzadeh,A

Palau (Game 37) 2009

[Damian Lemos]

In this game, my opponent had prepared the whole opening through to the middlegame, but the Fianchetto System proved to be extremely sturdy.

1.d4 f6 2.c4 g6 3.g3 g7 4.g2 0-0 5.c3 d6 6.f3 bd7 7.0-0 e5

So here we have the King’s Indian in its purest form, where Black plays ...Nbd7 followed by ...

e5. If you compare Fianchetto System with other King’s Indian variations, you will see that Black doesn’t get his usual kingside attacking chances. 8.h3 As previously

mentioned, h2-h3 is very often useful with our fianchetto formation, as it protects the

kingside and prevents moves like ...Ng4 or ...

Bg4.

[ White can also try 8.e4 here, but 8 h3 is more flexible as it leaves the g2-bishop’s diagonal open for the time being. This enables us to avoids lines such as a6 , followed by ...b5. ]

8...exd4

[ Black can delay 8...exd4 too, having several other possibilities – 8...a6 ]

[ 8...c6 ]

[ 8...e8 – which we’ll examine later in this chapter. ]

9.xd4 b6!? Black intends to free his position by playing ...c5 and probably ...d5.

Then White has to be careful about tactics on the a1-h8 diagonal, although the Ra1 will be protected after White plays Nc2.

[ Here 9...e8 10.e4 would transpose to 8...

Re8 lines. ] 10.b3 c5

[ The main alternative is 10...d5 , which is the subject of the next game. ]

11.c2 e6 Black has to prepare ...d5 as he cannot play it immediately.

[ After 11...d5? 12.cxd5 bxd5 13.xd5 xd5 14.xd5 , as just indicated, the

a1-rook is now protected by the knight. ] 12.b2 d7 13.h2 d5 So far both sides

have played natural moves and Black managed to achieve the ...d5 break. All the same, he hasn’t equalized yet. 14.xd5 bxd5 15.cxd5 xd5 16.xg7 xg7 Now, after a couple of trades, the position does seem to be equal. Nevertheless, White

has a slight advantage, in my opinion; he will have the stronger centre after playing e4, as well as the ability to attack on the kingside with f4-f5. 17.d2 This move prepares the e4 advance and guards the c3- and b4-squares.

[ The immediate 17.e4 is also worth considering, and if e7 then 18.f3 , followed by Qc3 and f4-f5. The resulting position is better for White, who has good attacking chances on the kingside. ]

17...fd8 18.ad1 I just wanted to make sure all my pieces were in play before advancing the e-pawn.

[ After analysing the position further, I think White can play this move without further preparation: 18.e4 f6 19.f4 and, given the chance, I would choose White. ]

18...b5

[ 18...e7 looks like a solid alternative for Black, but after 19.e4 c7 20.c3+ g8 21.f4 , I still prefer White’s position, as the

subsequent kingside expansion will be annoying for Black. ]

19.e4 b4 Black opts for an active continuation.

[ After 19...e7 20.c3+ , followed by Ne3 and f4, White again has good play on the kingside. ]

20.c3+ g8 21.xb4 cxb4

[ The endgame after 21...xb4 22.xb4 cxb4 23.e5 is difficult for Black. ]

22.f6 xd1 23.xd1 a5 Black presses on on the queenside, even though his king is very vulnerable. Therefore, I decided to open lines on the kingside with f4-f5. 24.f4 a4 25.f5 It is very important to remember that,

very often, material is not as relevant as the initiative. Here Black’s king is going to be extremely exposed. gxf5 26.g5+

This check looks great, but it's actually inaccurate.

[ It was better to insert 26.bxa4! , hoping to deflect Black’s queen or rook from kingside defence. , threatening Qc5+ or Qg7+, Black’s position is hopeless.;

C) Black would have to abandon the pawn with 26...c5 , though after 27.d4

, he would have find a succession of “only

moves” in order just to survive: f4! 28.gxf4 h6! 29.d3 h7 and yet is still somewhat

worse; for example, 30.b2 c4 31.g3 g8 32.xg8 xg8 33.f2 , since

xa2? loses to 34.g3+ f8 (or anywhere) 35.f5 c4 36.f6 and mate follows. ]

26...f8

[ 26...h8 27.f6+ g8 repeats the position, when we can return to 28.bxa4!

as in the previous note. ] 27.h6+ g8 28.bxa4?!

[ Now I probably should have played 28.exf5 xf5 29.bxa4 , since xa2? loses to

30.d4! followed by Rg4, but I didn’t want Black’s queen to come to the rescue of the king. ]

28...xa4 29.g5+ White always has the perpetual check in hand, but winning is a different story as there are only a few attacking pieces left. f8 30.h6+ g8 31.d2 b5 32.g5+ f8 33.exf5

Now Black should equalize with accurate play, but I was unable to see any other way to improve my position. xf5 34.h4 xa2 35.xb4+ g7?? Just as Black was getting

close to a draw, he blunders a piece.

[ Going to g8 was the only option. After 35...g8 36.d8+ ( 36.xa2 xa2

37.xb7 e6 is clearly drawish ) 36...g7 , White appears to have a strong attack, but I was unable to find a winning variation here, while Black threatens to win himself with ...

Qxh3+; for instance, 37.f8+ f6 38.h8+

e7 39.f8+ f6 is just perpetual check. ] 36.xa2 xa2 37.b2+ Now White is a

piece up and the win should be a matter of technique. The main plan is to trade queens off, after which it's all over. f6 38.xa2 b6 39.a4 b2 40.g4+ f8 41.f5 h6 42.h4 g7 43.h3 a1 44.d5 a7 45.e5+ g8 46.h2 d7 47.b8+ g7 48.b7 f5 49.g2 f2 50.e7 d4 51.e4 c5 52.d5 e3 53.h3 c3 54.f5 c7 55.e4 d6 56.f3 c7 57.g4+ f8 58.d4 c8+ 59.h2 e6 60.b4+ e8 61.e4 e7 62.g2

. I’m happy with how the opening went. since the resulting position after 13...d5 looks better for White, who will always have good

prospects on the kingside. As this game shows, getting full equality is not easy for Black.

1-0

E67 Akopian,V

Avrukh,B

Amsterdam (Game 38) 2005

[Damian Lemos]

1.d4 f6 2.c4 g6 3.g3 g7 4.g2 d6 5.c3 0-0 6.f3 bd7 7.0-0 e5 8.h3 exd4 9.xd4 b6 10.b3 d5 11.a3

[ Taking on d5 is not enough for an

advantage after 11.cxd5 fxd5 12.xd5 xd5 . In fact, it’s not easy for White to stop

a move like ...c5 or deal with the g7-bishop’s control over the long dark diagonal. ]

[ Instead, 11.c5 usually leads to the main line after bd7 ( but Black has another option here in 11...e4 with an unclear position, as played in L.Aronian-V.Ivanchuk, World Team Championship, Beersheva 2005; with 11 Ba3, White avoids this possibility ) 12.c6 e5 13.cxb7 xb7 14.a3 e8 . ]

11...e8 12.c5

[ Once again, White should not take on d5 as this frees Black’s position. After 12.cxd5 fxd5 13.xd5 xd5 , Black is close to

equality. ]

12...bd7 13.c6 The key to White’s strategy – creating weaknesses in Black’s queenside.

e5

[ It’s never too late to make a big mistake:

after 13...bxc6?? 14.xc6 , Black loses the queen! ]

14.cxb7 xb7 15.c1 An interesting

middlegame position has arisen. As a result of his opening, Black has a dynamic position, but he has some weaknesses on the queenside, so his pawn structure is not ideal. On the other hand, White has a solid pawn structure and the better prospects on the queenside.

The c5-square is a key hole, so a manoeuvre like Na4-c5 looks strong. c8 Black needs to activate his pieces as soon as possible.

Otherwise he’s going to be frustrated positionally.

[ The immediate 15...e4 is a bad idea in view of 16.xe4 dxe4 17.b5 and Black is likely to lose a pawn. ]

16.a4 Natural and strong; White heads straight for the hole on c5. e4 As pointed out already, Black has to play actively, and this is the best way to contest the c5-square.

[ Instead, after 16...ed7 17.c6! xc6 18.xc6 , White keeps his positional

advantage plus the bishop pair. ]

[ And not 16...fd7? 17.f4 c5 18.b5 , when Black is going to lose material. ] 17.c5 This is the logical follow-up.

[ The main alternative is 17.c2

, when White gradually improves his position;

but Black has good chances after the logical h5 , planning ...h4 to create some targets on

the kingside:

A) 18.f3 and now:

A1) 18...d7 19.d2 df6 20.xe4 xe4 21.c5 xc5 22.xc5

was good for White in M.Manolache-R.

Dragomirescu, European Championship, Aix-les-Bains 2011. In general, White wants to trade pieces, since the

endgame is much better for him due to Black’s weaknesses on the queenside.

( 22.-- );

A2) 18...xf3+!? is more interesting, with a complex position after 19.exf3 ( or 19.xf3 h4 ) 19...d6 20.c5 h4

.;

B) 18.b5 is also possible, though it requires giving up the bishop pair: a6 ( or similarly 18...c6 19.xa7 a8 20.xe4 etc ) 19.xa7 a8 20.xe4 dxe4 21.xd8 exd8 22.c5 and White

has won a pawn, but his knight is out on a limb and we shouldn’t underestimate Black’s two powerful bishops. ] 17...xc5 18.xc5 d7 19.e3

White shouldn’t move his bishop away, as that would allow Black to push ...c5.

[ For instance, 19.a3 c5 and Black suddenly gets a strong centre. ]

[ 19.xa7 is pointless, as after a8 20.c5 xc5 21.xc5 xa2 , Black regains the

pawn and stands much better due to his bishop pair. ]

19...xc5 20.xc5 f8 21.c2 c6!?

Black decides to reinforce his centre.

[ It was possible to advance with 21...c5 here too, but perhaps Black didn’t want to play with the hanging pawns, since White can now organize his forces more effectively after 22.e2 ; for example, d6 23.d2 and White has a slight advantage, in my opinion. ]

22.c1 b6 23.d1 h6 Black wants to keep a solid position. If he advances the c-pawn, he will have hanging pawns in the centre (c5/d5) again, thereby giving White some targets to attack.

[ After 23...c5 24.e2 cd8 25.cd2

( 25.d3!? , to stop Black’s following trick, is worth considering ) 25...d4 26.exd4 h6 27.dxc5 xd2 28.xd2 a5 , the position

is unclear.

The text move, on the other hand, seems a little passive and Akopian takes the chance to increase his advantage on the

queenside. ] 24.b4! f8

[ Of course Black cannot capture the b4-pawn, as after 24...xb4? 25.xc6 ( not 25.b2? e7 and everything is under

control ) 25...xc6 26.xc6 xc6 27.xc6 , White has a huge advantage. ]

25.b2

[ Here 25.a3!? is suggested by GM Mikhalevski,

In document Diseño físico de bases de datos (página 45-48)