Round 4 17th January 2001

BACK TO THE FUTURE

HAVE you ever read physicist Stephen Hawking's best-selling book A Brief History Of Time? You know, the one that try’s to explain in laymen’s terms all those difficult concepts in physics and mathematics we heard all about in the likes of Star Trek and Dr.Who; like Black Holes and Time-Travel.

No. Me neither. However, apparently it now heads the list of famous books that has never been read – a bit like all those heavy Mark Dvoretsky books we thought would turn us into GMs. Like me, you all went out to further educate yourself by buying “that book”, only to leave it lying somewhere prominently about your house like the coffee table or bookshelf, after a brief read of the dust-jacket.

Well, sitting in my usual berth in the press room, as I saw a King’s Gambit and an Evans Gambit being played on two adjacent boards, I was beginning to wish I had made a stab even at the introduction to the Hawkins epic. For a brief moment I thought we had actually gone back in time; probably all due to Kirsan Illyumzhinov meddling with all the time controls!

It was all a glorious throwback to a bygone romantic era in chess when players would take risks by randomly sacrificing material. Come to think of it, a bit like some of the players playing here in Wijk aan Zee: Morozevitch, Shirov, Fedorov and Topalov.

A century ago gambits were all the rage. Today they are almost extinct. A gambit is a bold sacrifice of material in the opening, usually a pawn, hoping for a quick kill. The word is derived from "gambetta," an Italian term that means tripping up an opponent's legs in wrestling, and not from the character Gareth Hunt played in The New Avengers.

Alas, for the most part these swashbuckling openings were analyzed deeply and discarded long ago. However, a bit like my wardrobe, they could come back into fashion.

Over the years, no adventure in chess has got as bad a press as the romantic King’s Gambit – except of course, Raymundo Keene and Brain Games for their “handling” of the recent title match between Kasparov and Kramnik!

The history of the King’s Gambit is almost as old as modern chess itself. It was first analysed in Giulio Polerio’s manuscript of the sixteenth century, reached its zenith of popularity in the nineteenth century, but now it has become unfashionable and has almost disappeared from competitive play due to the improvement in defensive technique.

One of its greatest protagonists, Rudolph Spielman, famously wrote about his disillusionment in a 1920s article, From the Sickbed of the King’s Gambit. Spurred by a loss to arch-rival Boris Spassky, Bobby Fischer looked for a definitive “refutation” of the Gambit, concluding that the correct way to play it was 1 e4 e5 2 f4 exf4 3 Nf3 d6!, which he subsequently published as A Bust to the King’s Gambit in the 1961 American Chess Quarterly.

However, thanks mainly to the efforts of Spassky and David Bronstein (who incidentally immortalised the opening with one of their famous encounters with the gambit from the 1960 USSR Championships being used in the opening sequence of the James Bond film, From Russia With Love), the modernisation process continued when it was at its lowest ebb.

Writing in his classic book 200 Open Games, the legendary Bronstein observed, “There is not a single true chessplayer in the world whose heart does not beat faster at the mere sound of such long beloved and familiar words as ‘gambit games’. In the first instance our delight is for the ancient weapon of the Romantics, Neo-Romantics and other chess d’Artagnans - the legendary King’s Gambit.”

Today the current standard bearer is Belorussian Alexei Fedorov. One of the world’s top players, he never shrinks a King’s Gambit challenge – even against the newly crowned Fide World Champion Vishy Anand!

Fedorov,A (2575) - Anand,V (2790)

1 e4 e5 2 f4 exf4 3 Nf3 g5 According to good 'ol Bobby, 3 ..d6!, is the refutation! 4 h4 g4 The Muzio Gambit, Mr Fedorov? 5 Ne5 No - The Kieseritzky Gambit! Dating back to Polerio in 1590, analysed by Salvio in 1604, and Philidor in 1749, it was popularised by the German\Polish player Lionel Kieseritzky in the 1840s. 5 ..d6 6 Nxg4 Nf6 7 Nxf6+ 7 Nf2!? was an idea advocated by Viktor Korchnoi in his book on the King’s Gambit, co-authored with Zak. 7 ..Qxf6 8 Nc3 Nc6 Black soon gained the upper-hand with 8 ..c6 9 Qf3 Rg8 10 Qf2 Bg4 11 d3 Bh6 , Nunn-Timman, Donner Memorial, 1996. 9 Nd5

A bit more in the spirited side was 9 d4 Qxd4 (9 ..Nxd4 10 Nd5 Qg7 11 Bxf4!) 10 Qf3 Bh6 11 Nd5 Nb4 12 Nxb4 Qxb4+ 13 c3 Qc5 14 g3 Rg8 15 gxf4 Bg4 16 Qf2 Qc6 17 Bg2 Bf5 18 Qf3 Kf8 19 Rh2 Bxe4 20 Qh5 d5 21 Bxe4 dxe4 22 Be3 Rg3 23 Re2 Re8 24 Rd1 Qf6 25 Rd5 Qg6 26 Kd1 Qxh5 27 Rxh5 Rg6 28 Bc5+ Kg8 29 f5 Re5 30 Bd4 Rd5 31 Rxe4 Rg1+ 32 Ke2 Rg2+ 33 Kf3 1–0 Hector,J-Nielsen,P/Copenhagen 1995/CBM 46 (33). 9 ..Qg6 10 d3 Qg3+ 11 Kd2 Ne7N

That's the trouble with the 8 ..Nc6 line - it all basically peters out to a draw, despite the voluntary king walk. Vishy's new idea is no better than the standard alternative here: 11 ..Be6 12 c3 0–0–0 13 Kc2 Bxd5 14 exd5 Ne7 15 Qh5 Qg6 16 Qf3 Bh6 17 Bxf4 Bxf4 18 Qxf4 Nxd5 19 Qf3 Qe6 20 g3 Ne3+ ½–½ Kristiansen,J-Nielsen,P/Ringsted 1995/CBM 47 ext 12 Qe1 12 Nxc7+ Kd8 13 Nxa8 Qe3+ 14 Kc3 Qc5+ 15 Kd2 Qe3+= 12 ..Nxd5 13 exd5+ Be7 14 Qxg3 fxg3 15 Be2 Rg8 16 Kd1 Bg4 17 Bg5 Bxg5 18 Bxg4 Bf6 19 Bf5 Kf8 20 c3 Re8 21 d4 h5 22 Rh3 Bg7 23 Rxg3 ½–½

England’s Michael Adams had better luck, however, when he secured the full point against Alexander Morozevich’s Evans Gambit. Invented in 1824 by the Welsh naval captain William Evans, whilst he was onboard his Royal Mail steam packet that sailed between Milford Haven and Waterford, the swashbuckling gambit soon took the imagination of the chess world when it was adopted to great effect on a regularly basis by the likes of McDonnell, Bourdonnais, Anderssen, Morphy, Chigorin and Steinitz.

However, despite being refuted, the gambit went out of fashion at the turn of the 19^th Century – only springing back to life in 1995 after Garry Kasparov rehabilitated it to defeat Vishy Anand at the Tal Memorial.

Morozevich,A (2745) - Adams,M (2746)

1 e4 e5 2 Nf3 Nc6 3 Bc4 Bc5 4 b4 Bxb4 5 c3 Ba5 6 d4 exd4 7 0–0 Nge7 8 Ng5 d5 9 exd5 Ne5 10 Bb3 0–0 11 cxd4 11 Nxh7 Kxh7 12 Qh5+ Kg8 13 Qxe5 Nf5= was Adams-Short, Sarajevo 1999, which soon ended in a draw.(13 ..dxc3 14 Nxc3 Bxc3 15 Qxc3 Nxd5 16 Qg3 Be6 17 Bb2 Nf6 18 Bc2 Nh5 19 Qf3 Qd5 20 Be4 Qg5 21 Bxb7 Rab8 22 Rae1 Qg4 23 Be5 Nf6 24 Bxc7 Rxb7 0–1 Fischer,R-Carbonell,R/Houston Simul, 1964 11 ..Ng4 12 Qf3?!

12 Ba3 Ng6! (This was Mickey's intended improvement over 12 ..Nxd5 , played in Anderssen-Mieses, Breslau 1867(!).) 13 Ne4 (13 Bxf8 Qxg5 14 Ba3 Qf4 15 g3 Qh6 16 h4 Nxh4! crashes through.) 13 ..Re8 and Black is better. 12 ..Nf6 13 Ba3 h6 14 Ne4 Nxe4 15 Qxe4 Re8 16 Bb2?! Adams felt that Morozevich had try for something like 16 Qf3 Nf5 17 d6 cxd6 18 g4!? Nh4 19 Qxf7+ Kh8 20 Qh5 - though Black still has the upper hand. 16 ..Nf5 17 Qf4 17 Qd3 Nd6 with ..Bf5 to follow. 17 ..Bb4 18 Na3 Bd6 19 Qd2 Qh4!

20 g3 20 f4? Re4! 21 g3 Nxg3 22 hxg3 Qxg3+ 23 Qg2 Qxg2+ 24 Kxg2 Re2+ 25 Rf2 Rxb2! 26 Rxb2 Bxa3 27 Re2 Bg4 28 Re3 Bd6 with a big advantage. 20 ..Qh3 In reflection, Adams thought that perhaps he would have been better with 20 ..Qg4 21 f3 Qh3 , as it weakens the White kingside to a greater degree. 21 Nc4 b5 22 Ne5 Bb7! 22 ..Nxd4?! 23 Bxd4 (23 Qxd4? Bxe5 24 Qe3 Bg4 25 Bxe5 Rxe5 26 Qxe5 Bf3) 23 ..Bxe5 24 Bxe5 Rxe5 25 Rae1 Bg4 26 f4! Rxe1 27 Rxe1 and White is better placed - he's more centralised and the Black queenside pawns are weaker. 23 Rae1?! More accurate, according to Adams, was 23 Nc6! Ne7 (23 ..Nh4 24 f4!) 24 Rac1 a5! 23 ..a5! 24 a3? White's only hope of lasting longer was 24 Qd3 a4 25 Bc2 Bxd5 26 f3 Rxe5! 27 Rxe5 (27 dxe5?? Bc5+ 28 Kh1 Nxg3#) 27 ..Bxe5 28 Qxf5 Qxf5 29 Bxf5 Bf6 - though Adams believed he should have no problem converting. 24 ..b4 25 axb4 Bxb4 26 Bc3? The final blunder. 26 Qc2 Bxe1 27 Rxe1 Rac8 , and Adams thought that it wasn't easy to win; mainly due to his weak c-pawn. 26 ..Bxc3 27 Qxc3 Nh4 0–1

World Champion (I’m sorry – I can’t bring myself to mention Brain Games twice in one article!) Vladimir Kramnik’s game and Alexei Shirov’s game however took the imagination of the audience – and Garry Kasparov! So enthralled by both games, he was an avid spectator along with the committee members of the Corus Tournament as hey switched from game-to-game on their private TV screen they had in their office.

Coming at a timely moment as he meets Kasparov in the top game of round five, Kramnik’s win allows him to join the former champion in the top spot.

Kramnik,V (2772) - Tiviakov,S (2597)

1 d4 Nf6 2 c4 e6 3 Nc3 Bb4 4 e3 0–0 5 Bd3 d5 6 Nf3 c5 7 0–0 Nc6 8 a3 Bxc3 9 bxc3 dxc4 10 Bxc4 Qc7 The old main-line! Very popular in the 1950s and 1960s. 11 Bb2 e5 12 h3 e4 13 Nd2 Na5 14 Ba2 Bf5?!N

Limiting the scope of the White bishop-pair with 14 ..c4 is almost obligatory here: 14 ..c4 15 f3 Bxh3 16 Nxe4 Nxe4 17 fxe4 f6 18 e5 Bd7 19 exf6 Rxf6 20 Rxf6 gxf6 21 Qh5 Rf8 22 Rf1 Be8 23 Qh4 Qg7 24 e4 Bg6 25 Bc1 Re8 26 e5 f5 27 Bg5 Qd7 28 Bf6 b5 29 Bb1 Kf7 30 Qh3 1–0 Van den Berg,C-Kramer,H/Amsterdam 1957. 15 c4 Rfe8 16 d5! Opening up the a1–h8 diagonal. The white-squared bishop now has no future on a2, so soon will be moved to the b1–h7 diagonal - both bishop's looking to hit the Black king. 16 ..Nd7 17 f4! exf3 Practically forced. After 17 ..Rad8 18 Qh5! Bg6 19 Qh4 - Black's going to be hard-pressed to stop onslaught after g4. 18 Qxf3 Bg6 19 h4! There's no respite for Black from here in. 19 ..h5 20 Bb1 Qd6 20 ..Bxb1?? 21 Qxf7+ Kh8 22 Qxg7# 21 Bc3 b6 22 Ne4 Rxe4?! The alternative wasn't all that appetising either: 22 ..Qe7 23 Bxa5! bxa5 24 Ng5 Ne5 (24 ..Qxe3+? 25 Qxe3 Rxe3 26 Bxg6 fxg6 27 Rae1! Rxa3 (The two alternatives lead to similar endings that win for White: 27 ..Rae8 28 Rxe3 Rxe3 29 Rf7 Nf8 30 Rxa7 Rxa3 31 Ra8; 27 ..Ree8 28 Rxe8+ Rxe8 29 Rf7) 28 Re7 Nf8 29 Rff7 Rc3 30 Rxg7+ Kh8 31 Ne4 Rc1+ 32 Kh2 Rf1 (32 ..Rxc4 33 Nf6!) 33 d6 and Black's paralysed as he can only look on as White passes the d-pawn.) 23 Bxe4 Nxc4 24 Qf4 Qxf4 25 Rxf4 Nxe3 26 Bf3 Nc2 27 Ra2!

27 Rd1? Nxa3 28 d6 Rd8 29 Be2 (29 Bb2 Nb5! 30 Be2 a6 31 Bc4 Nb8!) 29 ..f6 30 Ra4 Nb1! and Black has good chances of holding this. 27 ..Re8 28 g4?! 28 Bxh5! Bxh5 29 Rxc2 looked more clinical. 28 ..hxg4 29 Bxg4 Ne5? To be fair, Tiviakov was in serious time pressure for most of the last quarter of this game. However... 29 ..Nf8! 30 h5 Bd3 31 Bf5 Bxf5 32 Rxf5 Nd4 33 Bxd4 cxd4 , and White still has a bit of work left to do at the office - though should convert with ease. 30 d6! Nxg4 30 ..f6! 31 Bxe5 fxe5 32 Ra4! Rd8 33 d7 Ne3 34 Be6+ Bf7 35 Bxf7+ Kxf7 36 Rxa7 Ke6 37 Rb7 , and the rook's should clean up. 31 Rxg4 Re6 31 ..Rd8 32 Rxg6 fxg6 33 Rxc2 Rxd6 34 Rd2! 32 h5 Bd3 33 d7 Rd6 34 Rxg7+ Kf8 35 h6 Nd4 36 Rag2 Bg6 37 Rf2! Nf5 38 h7 1–0

Despite a vote that was as close as the Florida race between George W Bush and Al Gore (except without the protracted legal action), the winner, however, of the daily Audience Prize for best game of the round when to Alexei Shirov for this typical piece of bravado against the hapless Jeroen Piket – a win that also gives him the joint lead with Kasparov and Kramnik.

Shirov,A (2718) - Piket,J (2632)

1 e4 e5 2 Nf3 Nf6 3 Nxe5 d6 4 Nf3 Nxe4 5 d4 d5 6 Bd3 Bd6 7 0–0 0–0 8 c4 c6 9 Re1 Bf5 10 Qc2 An uncommon move favoured by the Israeli, Lev Yudashin The most popular choice has been 10 Nc3 or 10 Qb3 10 ..Bg6 11 c5 Bc7 12 Nc3 Nf6 12 ..Nxc3 13 Bxg6 hxg6 14 bxc3 Nd7 15 Bg5 ½–½ Yudasin,L-Rozentalis,E/Leningrad 1990/URS-ch. 13 Bg5 Nbd7 14 Ne5 Bxd3 15 Qxd3 Qc8 16 f4 Ba5 17 Qg3!

Shirov makes his intentions quite clear - Attack! 17 ..Kh8 18 Qh4 Bxc3 19 bxc3 Ne4 20 Re3! Nxg5 21 Qxg5 h6 The other option didn't bare thinking about: 21 ..f6?? 22 Ng6+! hxg6 23 Qxg6! (23 Rh3+? Kg8 24 Qxg6 Qe8 25 Qh7+ Kf7 26 Qh5+ Kg8 27 Qh7+=) 23 ..Nxc5 24 Re7! Ne6 25 Re1 wins with ease. 22 Qh5 Nf6 23 Nxf7+! Kh7 24 Ng5+ Kg8 25 Qg6 hxg5 26 Re7 Ne8 27 Rae1 Qg4 The only move - Black's paralysed. 28 fxg5?

How does Black defend against the simple 28. g3? 28 g3! Rc8 a)28 ..Qf3 29 Qe6+ Kh8 (a)29 ..Kh7 30 Qh3+ Kg6 31 R1e6+ Rf6 32 Rxf6+ Nxf6 33 f5+ Qxf5 34 Rxg7+!) 30 Qh3+ Kg8 31 R7e3!; b)28 ..Qf5 29 Qxf5 Rxf5 30 Rxe8+ Rxe8 31 Rxe8+ Kf7 32 Re5!; 29 Rxe8 Rcxe8 30 Rxe8 Rxe8 (30 ..Qd1+ 31 Kg2 Qd2+ 32 Kh3 Rxe8 33 Qxe8+ Kh7 34 Qh5+ Kg8 35 Qxg5) 31 Qxe8+ Kh7 32 fxg5 Qd1+ 33 Kg2 Qd2+ 34 Kh3 Qxg5 35 Qe6 (35 Qf7? Qh6+=) 35 ..Qd2 And yes, it might be a queen and pawn ending, but White is ideally placed to win from here. 28 ..Qh4? I may be wrong, but I can't quite see how Shirov wins after 28 ..Rb8! 29 h3 (29 g3?? Qh3! 30 Rxe8 Rbxe8 31 Rxe8 Qf1#; 29 Rxe8?? Rbxe8 30 Rxe8 Qd1+ 31 Re1 Qxe1#) 29 ..Qf4! 30 Rxe8 Rbxe8 31 Rxe8 Qf1+ 32 Kh2 Qf4+ 33 Kg1 Qf1+= Do let us know if I've missed something here! 29 g3 Qh3 29 ..Qg4? 30 Rf1! (30 Rxb7? Qf3=) 30 ..Rxf1+ (30 ..Rf3 31 Rf2! A clever way to avoid a whole load of queen checks that could lead to a perpetual. 31 ..Rxf2 (31 ..Rd8 32 Rxe8+ Rxe8 33 Qxe8+ Kh7 34 Qe2!) 32 Kxf2 Qd1 33 Rxe8+ Rxe8 34 Qxe8+ Kh7 35 Qe2!) 31 Kxf1 Qd1+ 32 Kg2 Qd2+ (32 ..Qc1 33 Rxe8+ Rxe8 34 Qxe8+ Kh7 35 Qh5+ Kg8 36 g6 Qd2+ 37 Kh3!) 33 Kh3 and White wins - Black can't move anything - and if he does, there's never going to be a perpetual. 30 Rxb7 This is the difference to the previous note: Shirov now has good compensation by mopping up the pawns and exchanging the queens. 30 ..Qf5 31 Qe6+!

31 ..Qxe6 32 Rxe6 Rf7 33 Rxf7 Kxf7 34 Rxc6 Rb8 35 Ra6 Rb7 36 h4 Four pawns for the piece is a good deal - especially as Black's pieces are so badly placed. With his clock hanging, the speed of Shirov'e accurate moves here was an impressive sight. 36 ..Nc7 37 Rd6 Nb5 38 g6+ Ke7 39 Rxd5 Nxc3 40 Re5+ Kf6 41 c6 Rb1+ 42 Kg2 Rb2+ 43 Kf3 1–0

The views expressed here do not necessarily reflect those of TWIC, Chess & Bridge Ltd or the London Chess Center.