Escolar Documentos
Profissional Documentos
Cultura Documentos
XIIIIIIIIY
9r+lwq-trk+0
9+-zp-vlpzpp0
9p+n+-sn-+0
9+p+pzp-+-0
9-+-+P+-+0
9+LzP-+N+-0
9PzP-zP-zPPzP0
9tRNvLQtR-mK-0
xiiiiiiiiy
Acknowledgments
Tim Harding is principal author survey and many games (some with special thanks for making the latest
and editor-in-chief of this work. notes from his friends) and checked version of their PGN-to-HTML free
He wishes to acknowledge the a lot of the work, making numerous software available. Though they
excellent work done by his two useful suggestions. did not know it, Palview3 was
co-authors but also several Artis Gaujens provided our email released just in time to be used
other people who have made link to Janis Vitomskis and helped in the game web on this CD, and
contributions of various kinds. in various ways. Numerous other Andrew Templeton (their Canadian
Henk de Jongh, without being players (including some eminent programmer) was especially helpful
asked, volunteered a deep analysis grandmasters) also contributed in providing assistance here.
of the Pawn Push line and ideas in analysis and games, or responded He has asked me to stress,
the Kevitz Variation. to queries about their games. however, that this web is essentially
Janko Bohak was the source Hanon W. Russell supplied the a free bonus that you are getting
for most of our information on the photograph of Frank Marshall. on the CD; we cannot give any
Slovenian Pawn Push. Alexander Baburin helped guarantees about it. It may not
Boris Mikhailovich Shkurovich- translate a few sentences from Boris work on some early browsers
Khazin contributed an article about Shkurovich-Khazins article. and it may not work with some
his experiences with the 9...e4 Joe at Reprint did the CD face operating systems like Windows
variation on which he is a particular and cover design. Clarinda Noonan XP which was being developed
expert. His article is not a complete helped with proof-reading. at the dame time as Palview3. You
survey of this double-edged line, Adobe Inc. gave permission to should be lucky; let us know of
but it gives new insights on how include their Acrobat Reader and any successes or disappointments,
this variation can be approached. ChessBase GmbH gave permission but dont be expecting your money
His article should be studied in for us to include ChessBase Light back if the javascript pages do not
conjunction with the survey on on the CD; the rights to both these work on your system.
the variation written by Janis. free software products of course Finally, my wife and daughters
John Elburg whose book and remain with the original publishers, put up with me, especially in
CD reviews you have probably Adobe and ChessBase. the difficult final stages when
read on the Chess Mail website The Palview team at everything becomes subordinated
provided the Simmelink Variation www.palamede.com deserve to getting the CD off to mastering.
expose weaknesses in the white and a draw by repetition occurs. Black is going for ...f5, intending
queenside. Also the move ...c6- d) The thrust c3-c4. This only ...f4 followed up by play against
c5, challenging the white d-pawn, occurs in a few variations and is the White King.
sometimes has merit. rarely good because the result is a After Black has played ...f5, Whites
h) The long white diagonal. weakened white d-pawn and often light-squared is actually quite a
Except in the variation 11...b7, a weakened b-pawn also. strong piece, x-raying the diagonal
the diagonal a8-h1 is usually e) Whites knight. After winning up to the Black K on g8. Black often
partially closed, but there are some the pawn on e5, each player has has to play ...Kh8 (or sometimes
cases where Black can make use only one knight and White has the even ...Kf8) to unpin his pieces
of this diagonal to bring pressure problem of how to develop his to before he can continue with his
on g2 which is a sensitive square make it of comparable value to its attack. Therefore White should only
in Whites castled position. The counterpart, the black (or the exchange his bishop for knight d5
diagonal can also be important black light-squared in cases if this leads to concrete advantage,
in cases where Whites xd5 can where xd5 has been played). or after Black has removed his king
be met by ...xd5 (rare, but bad Sometimes the can effectively from the diagonal.
news for White if it happens) or by go to a3, but almost always it goes White has to react in some way
...xd5 (in the Spassky Variation. to d2 and then its future depends to ...f5, otherwise he will soon have
on the specific variation. problems. There are two ways:
Main Ideas for White Generally speaking, Black must Blocking with f4:
a) The main idea for White to never, if he has already played ...f5, White plays f4 to slow down
gain counterplay in most variations allow White to play -f3-e5 and Blacks attack. He must however
is the advance a2-a4. The dual must be ready to exchange one of pay attention, that the square f4 is
purpose is to get the a1-rook his bishops for the knight in that under control, or Black will follow
into play and to destabilise the case. There are also some cases up with a piece sacrifice on f4.
queenside pawn structure of the where the can be effective on e4. A good example is what
Marshall player. Depending on If Black can keep the confined happened in the game
circumstances, Black may capture to a defensive role on d2 or f1 then Novopashin-Spassky, Leningrad
on a4, play ...b5-b4 to keep the he should be doing well. In lines 1962: 18 a4 bxa4 19 xa4 f5 20 f4?.
a-file closed (and try to create a where Black opens the g-file or Spassky played 20...xf4! (See the
weakness on c3), or he may allow h-file, White may need his Knight annotated game).
White to capture on b5. to protect h2 or to interpose on g3 If a piece sacrifice is not
b) The exchange on d5. Playing against a rook check. possible, Black can continue to
b3xd5 is a double-edged sword open up Whites kingside with ...g5,
for White. The knight is often sometimes sacrificing a third pawn
pinned (if Black has played ...f5) with ...f4, after White has captured
and does not need to be captured with fxg5.
unless Black expends a tempo A disadvantage of the f4-block
on ... h8. Also the bishop on Strategic guidelines is, that Whites dark-squared
b3 is potentially a strong piece. on the 17...Re6 line becomes even worse. Another
Nevertheless the resulting black drawback of the f4-block is that
pawn on d5 can sometimes be a (By Martin Bennedik) Black is now able to exert some
weakness, forcing Black to gambit pressure on the e-file with ...fe8
Black has sacrificed a pawn.
a second pawn. and ...Kh8.
Blacks pieces are actively
c) The queen manoeuvre to f1/ Another reaction to ...f5, which
developed on the kingside.
g2. When Blacks queen goes to h4, has been analysed recently is the
The e-file is open and blocked by
forcing g2-g3, and then appears counter-attack.
Whites dark-squared .
on h3, White has light-square White is continuing to disrupt
Whites dark-squared is bad. It
weaknesses near his king and Blacks queenside pawns and he
can not easily be activated.
usually must challenge the black is ready to sacrifice a piece on
The white squares on Whites
queen. So -d3-f1 (sometimes f4 himself, this time to eliminate
kingside are weakened and
d1-f1, as in the 13 e2 line) the dangerous Black f-pawn, not
occupied by Blacks and .
offers the exchange of queens and allowing it to open up his kingside.
Whites a1- is not yet in the
usually drives the black queen Whites counter attack is successful,
game.
back to h5 (sometimes f5/g4) after if he is able to win enough material
Black certainly has compensation
which the white queen can go to g2 back on the queenside.
for the pawn.
(or occasionally f2). However the Examples for the method of
White will go for a4, intending to
queen is not always well placed on counter-attack include Quigleys
disrupt Blacks queenside pawns
g2, especially if ...h3 is coming bust and Ivanchuks game against
and thereby activating his rook
next to attack her. Sometimes the Short.
a1.
two queens play hide-and-seek
The Total Marshall 8
Our recommendations
Most readers will probably be out for a win, wants to keep the like 12 d3, 13 e2 or the Kevitz
eager to have a quick summary of draw in hand or intends to be as testifies to the fact that few masters
our discoveries. Which lines are flexible as possible in the hope the and grandmasters are confident of
viable for Black, which should be opponent will make the irrevocable obtaining any advantage against the
avoided and what is Whites best commitments. A consistent mind- Spassky Variation.
approach? set is important for both players 7. Against the 12 d3 d6 13
The first and last of those to guide their decisions at critical e1 line, which is probably the
questions cannot really be moments in the late opening/ early most dangerous alternative to the
answered completely, as it is middle-game. main line, it seems that 13...f5
partly a matter of taste which sound If Black really wants to play is perhaps not good enough,
variation you want to play. Even for a win, then the Classical Pawn although we have found some
the unsound lines can be great Push (involving ...ae8 and ...f5) improvements for Black and
fun and profitable in blitz play. definitely puts White under early maybe you can develop them.
However if we are talking about pressure, but we must warn you Also after 13...h4 14 g3 h3 15
important games where the result that if White keeps finding the e4 the line with ...d7 and ...b7
matters, then here are our main absolutely best moves, then you is looking suspect. However the
recommendations. may end up with a lost position. line with ...f5-g6 (as in Kilgour-
1. Black should certainly avoid The same goes for the 9...e4 line, Vitomskis) is recommendable and
9...e4, and play 9...xd5. After 10 which wins a lot of games but is also the supposedly refuted plan
xe5 xe5 11 xe5 he should play not recommended against masters. with 15...f6 looks OK for Black
either 11...c6 or 11...b7. A little-known line suitable for in view of the two improvements
2. If White does not want to beating weak opponents is the we recommend. (The dramatic
accept the Marshall, 9 d4 is the best Slovenian Pawn Push but White improvement by Vitomskis at move
choice but he would be better off has one line that must be very 26 in Whites supposed model game
not playing 8 c3 in that case. carefully checked (see the end of Anand-Cooper seems to overturn
3. After 11...c6 (which occurs the variation survey). the assessment of that line).
in a high percentage of Marshall 5. Most Marshall games are 8. Against the Kevitz line,
games), these are the lines which decided in the phase between Vitomskis has made some new
offer White the main chances of an moves 12 and 25 where one player discoveries for Black and we think
advantage: may know all the theory and the there is nothing to fear here.
a) The main line with 12 d4 other may not: who knows most, 9. Possibly the 13 e2 line is
d6 13 e1 h4 14 g3 h3 15 wins! Theory in some variations more important as in many cases
e3 followed by 18 a4, intending goes even beyond move 30. If you Black seems to get just general
to play Quigleys refutation if Black dont feel happy as Black about Marshall compensation: this is OK
replies 18...f5. getting into a deep theoretical when the second player is stronger
b) The line 12 d4 d6 13 e1 debate with your opponent, the but when White is the stronger
h4 14 g3 h3 15 e4. This was most suitable variations are 11...b7 player you would like something
claimed as a refutation of the or 11...c6 followed by 15...e8 (or specific to follow. In this case, Tim
Marshall in the early 1970s, but 15...a7 which often leads to the Harding has taken a new look at the
methods were found against it. same position). These little-known game Mithrakanth-Geller.
Nevertheless there are still several lines give Black sufficient positional 10. In this Internet era, many
unclear lines where play is not easy compensation, dont require deep games are appearing in databases
for either side. Often Black wins the theoretical knowledge and can get which were played on the Internet
exchange and has to defend, which White out of the book quickly. and which sometimes feature
is rather different from most lines 6. For the player with a deep interesting and sharp ideas.
of the Marshall. However, White is knowledge of the Marshall, we 11. Finally, both White and
also running risk in this line. recommend that you follow the Black need to remember that there
c) The line 12 d3, also intending main line with 17...e6 when White are numerous sidelines and tricks
to follow up with e4. There has allows it and then meet 18 a4 by that are playable in occasional
been considerable development in Spasskys 18...h5. Fischers phrase games, if not as the mainstay of
this variation in the past 12 years. best by test applies here and you your repertoire. Studying these
d) The line 12 d4 d6 13 have the comfort of knowing that sidelines (such as the alternatives
e2 where a lot of the earlier you are following in the footsteps at moves 12 and 15) will improve
conclusions are suspect. of most of the strongest GMs who your feel for the Marshall and
4. Black is advised to decide have played the Marshall. The general knowledge of the variation,
early in the game (not later than tendency in the 1990s and early which may stand you in good stead
move 11) whether he is going all 21st century for White to play lines in the future.
9 The Total Marshall
to cover f3) 14...f4 (14...d6!?) e-file unguarded and go on This is the second major
15 e3 and there are several kingside adventures, because crossroads. White has tried
games in the database, without the threats it can generate are many moves here, but most of
a clear conclusion. Variations in easily met whereas Black can them are obsolete and only 15
the Vitomskis survey show that combine attacks down the e4 and 15 e3 are really cur-
the bishop move may not be e-file and threats to trap the rent variations.
quite good enough. rook itself. There can follow a) 15 xd5 cxd5 is not seen
Therefore 13...h4 is 13...e8 (13...f6 14 h4 e8 as often as in the early days of
normal but after 14 g3 Black is also playable; see Perrenot- the Marshall. If White intends
has to decide where to place Tinture) 14 g5 c7 (Threat- to follow up with e3 etc. then
his queen. Both 14...h3 and ening ...g4!; the immediate he may as well postpone this
14...h5!? have pros and cons; 14...g4!? 15 f3 was unclear exchange until later. For lines
see the illustrative games and in Piqueras-Arellano.) 15 d2 of independent significance,
Vitomskis survey for details. h6 16 xd5 cxd5 17 e3 has no see the survey The exchange
For a general assessment, obvious refutation but with the at d5. Usually 16 e3 (16 f3!?)
Vitomskis has discussed this line bishop pair, solid structure and 16...g4 17 d3 ae8 18 d2
with World Seniors Champion, active pieces, Black must have e6 transposes to 18 xd5.
GM Janis Klovans, who plays adequate compensation for the b) 15 f3 g4 16 g2 has
this line (after Hellers sugges- sacrificed pawn. generally been seen as a good
tion) for many years. His opin- c) 13 g5 has all the disad- line for Black, but after the
ion (after the Anand-Khalifman vantages of 13 h5 and none of standard refutation 16...h5
game) is pretty close to that of the good points; it simply does 17 e3! f3 18 f1 f5 19 d2
Vitomskis: standard Marshall not threaten anything. 13...e8 f4 White improves by 20 xf4!
compensation, play for a pawn. is probably the best answer. xf4 21 xf3 xf3 22 d1
So these Latvian grandamsters White cannot win a pawn by 14 ending with +2 v + and
conclude that maybe 13 e2 xd5 cxd5 15 xd5?? because of probably an edge to White.
is less dangerous for Black as 15...xh2+. Consequently, the options
other lines. 17...ae8!? and 17...fe8 need
Martin Bennedik however Now we return to the main to be revaluated. (For this
feels that when you look at line, namely 13 e1. and other minor options see
specifics, Black is not equalis- 13...h4 Tim Hardings survey Various
ing, so it may be time to take Other moves such as 13...c7 Options at Move 15.)
another view of the line and and 13...f5 can be found in the c) 15 e4 is the main alter-
come up with a whole new plan database but the direct h4 is native.
for Black. Tim Harding believes the only move to find favour XIIIIIIIIY
that the plan Black used in with masters. There is a direct 9r+l+-trk+0
Mithrakanth-Geller definitely threat to h2 and Whites choice 9+-+-+pzpp0
deserves more attention. is limited, 9p+pvl-+-+0
Other 13th moves for White 14 g3 9+p+n+-+-0
are rarely seen: Not 14 h3? xh3! 15 9-+-zPR+-+0
a) 13 g5?! c7 14 e1 (14 gxh3 xh3 16 e5 (16 f4 ae8) 9+LzP-+-zPq0
f4? h6+ Marshall or 14 xd5?! 16...xe5 17 dxe5 fe8. 9PzP-+-zP-zP0
cxd5 15 xd5 xh2+ 16 h1 14...h3 9tRNvLQ+-mK-0
a7 17 g3 xg3 18 fxg3 xg3 XIIIIIIIIY xiiiiiiiiy
+) 14...xh2+ (Stojadinovic- 9r+l+-trk+0
Hbner) returns the pawn for 9+-+-+pzpp0 See the survey by Janis Vitom-
no apparent good reason. 9p+pvl-+-+0 skis and additional analysis by
b) 13 h5!? is the kind 9+p+n+-+-0 Tim Harding. The most promis-
of amateur/computer move 9-+-zP-+-+0 ing line for Black at present may
more often seen nowadays on 9+LzP-+-zPq0 be 15...g5 (countering the threat
the Internet than in the early 9PzP-+-zP-zP0 of h4) 16 f3 f5 and now
years of the Marshall. Gener- 9tRNvLQtR-mK-0 17 c2 is the older move, and
ally speaking, it is unwise for xiiiiiiiiy after 30 years of debate it is still
the white rook to leave the unclear!
The Total Marshall 12
survey by Martin Bennedik. (For I will get those out of the 21...f4 is playable (For 21...h3!?
18...e6 see the Spassky Varia- way first. see the illustrative game Hala-
tion, 18 a4 h5, below.) a) 18 f4?? is a weak computer mus-Tsvetkov.) 22 xf4 xf4!
b) 17...f5 is the Classical (or move. Black continues 18...f5 (Not 22...h3? 23 xe6! refut-
you might say, restrained) Pawn and wins a piece on the e-file. ing the old ECO drawing line)
Push. This is both considered in b) 18 c4 f4!. For details see 23 xe6 xe6 24 gxf4. See
the survey by Tim Harding and the survey by Janis Vitomskis. Kronborg Kristensen-Olano
the additional contribution by The main line goes 19 cxd5 Aizpurua in the database. This
Henk de Jongh, which readers h6 20 e4 xh2+ 21 f1 and position definitely needs more
can compare for themselves. now Black has two promising attention; maybe Black can find
There are two main lines, with lines discussed in the survey: something new here? One pos-
transpositional possibilities from 21...f5 and 21... xe3. Instead sibility is 20...bxa4 as proposed
16...f5. The play is exciting with if 19 f1 xe3 20 xh3 xh3 by John Elburg.
good winning chances for Black 21 cxb5 c2 22 xe6 fxe6!
against inferior defence, but if 23 gxf4 xa1 24 xa1 xf4 Returning to the last diagram,
White plays very accurately then (Feldmus-Vitomskis, corr 1983). if White plays 18 f1 rather
Black is struggling to survive. White scored one shock win in than opening the queenside,
c) Another legal move is 1975 with 19 xf4?! but Black Black is not in a position to
17...h8 which is designed can refute it by 19...xf4 20 f1 permit the queen exchange but
to induce xd5 but has no e2+. must play 18...h5.
apparent merit. Either it will c) 18 d1 is tricky but fine XIIIIIIIIY
transpose to some normal lines for Black if he knows what to 9-+-+-trk+0
or just prove a waste of tempo do. The move was reintroduced 9+-+-+pzpp0
in the end. by Ljubojevic in 1988 although 9p+pvlr+-+0
Spassky had met it in one of his 9+p+n+-+q0
Now we return to the main earliest Marshall games more 9-+-zP-+l+0
line at 17...e6. than 20 years earlier! After 9+LzP-vL-zP-0
XIIIIIIIIY 18...xd1! 19 axd1 f5 20 f3! 9PzP-sN-zP-zP0
9-+-+-trk+0 Black is OK with 20...g6! fol- 9tR-+-tRQmK-0
9+-+-+pzpp0 lowing Ljubojevic-Nunn. xiiiiiiiiy
9p+pvlr+-+0 d) 18 g5!? (with the idea of
9+p+n+-+-0 exchanging rooks on e6) is not Now Black threatens to regain
9-+-zP-+l+0 in the books; it is an Internet the tempo by attacking Whites
9+LzPQvL-zPq0 move which has a plus score queen with his . Here 19 a4
9PzP-sN-zP-zP0 in our database because it has will transpose to lines con-
9tR-+-tR-mK-0 never been played against a sidered elsewhere under 18
xiiiiiiiiy strong master. Vitomskis says a4; probably best is 19...h3
it is good but not a winning which is a transposition to the
In our Surveys database, the move and Black can equalize Spassky Variation, considered
lines following this position are e.g. 18...fe8 (18...h6!?) 19 xe6 below. However, if he prefers
considered in a separate survey xe6 20 e4 f5 21 f3 xg3! Black can also play 19...f5 (see
entitled Marshall 17...e6 Over- (see Zimmermann-Schwetlick note to Whites 19th below) or
view. There are also numerous in the database). 19...bxa4 heading for what we
detailed surveys of the specific e) 18 xd5 cxd5 gives a call the Old Main Line, 20 xa4
lines. position that can also arise if f5 21 f4.
the exchange at d5 was made There are also some non-
For alternatives up to this sooner. (See Tim Hardings critical independent lines where
point, see the survey Marshall survey.) White has various White does not play a4. See the
Attack Overview and the spe- plans now, but the only one to surveys and database. If 19
cific variation surveys. In this cause Black concern is 19 a4 f5 xd5 cxd5 then once more see
position, Whites most critical 20 f1 h5 21 axb5!?; this was the survey on The Exchange
move is 18 a4 but he often plays dismissed as a draw for many at d5;
18 f1 (which can transpose) years until Whites play was
and sometimes other moves improved in the 1990s. Now it Now we return to considering
are tried. is the critical line, for example Whites most popular variation
The Total Marshall 14
against the whole Marshall, not dangerous and Black can 18...f5?, Black has some other
which is 18 a4. choose between 20... fe8 (see moves.
This is a logical move, trying Olafsson-Harding) or 20...h3 a) 18...b4!? is the Simmelink
to get the white rook into play (Herbrechtsmeier-im). Variation; see the survey by
and threatening the security of Part 3 of the survey deals John Elburg. This line probably
Blacks queenside. with 20 f1, which is gener- should leave White an edge,
Before discussing in detail ally considered the critical line. because Blacks 18th essentially
the replies which have been Nevertheless, Black once more gives White a tempo, but the
historically the most popular has two playable continuations: move does have one advantage:
here, we want to make our the older 20...fe8 (as in our older books hardly mention it (if
recommendation for Black annotated game Rittner-Sarink) at all) so many opponents will
absolutely clear. and 20...f5!? putting the ques- have to start thinking for them-
tion to the white queen at once. selves immediately. Dutch play-
18...h5! = This move, which proved sound ers have investigated this vari-
XIIIIIIIIY in such games as Karpov-Short ation in recent email events but
9-+-+-trk+0 and Ljubojevic-Nikolic, is there is still a lot to discover.
9+-+-+pzpp0 essentially a development of b) 18...bxa4!? is still some-
9p+pvlr+-+0 the 1990s. times played but its survival is
9+p+n+-+q0 It is really no mystery why on a knife-edge. The critical line
9P+-zP-+l+0 White has been playing lines seems to go 19 xa4 (19 xa4
9+LzPQvL-zP-0 such as 12 d3 in recent years. f4) 19...f5 20 f1 (20 f4? xf4!
9-zP-sN-zP-zP0 At the highest level, he is see the annotated game Novo-
9tR-+-tR-mK-0 getting nowhere against the pashin-Spassky) 20...h5
xiiiiiiiiy Spassky Variation. XIIIIIIIIY
9-+-+-trk+0
This is the Spassky Varia- Now we shall outline what is 9+-+-+-zpp0
tion, which we recommend for happening with other replies by 9p+pvlr+-+0
Black. See the three-part survey Black after 18 a4. 9+-+n+p+q0
by Janis Vitomskis and the illus- XIIIIIIIIY 9R+-zP-+l+0
trative games, starting with Tal- 9-+-+-trk+0 9+LzP-vL-zP-0
Spassky (1st game). To avoid 9+-+-+pzpp0 9-zP-sN-zP-zP0
confusing matters unduly, we 9p+pvlr+-+0 9+-+-tRQmK-0
wont go into much detail here 9+p+n+-+-0 xiiiiiiiiy
except to say that we believe the 9P+-zP-+l+0
Spassky line is not only Blacks 9+LzPQvL-zPq0 Black is steering for the
soundest continuation, but that 9-zP-sN-zP-zP0 old main line, which would
it also offers good dynamic 9tR-+-tR-mK-0 arise now if White played 21
chances. When White plays for xiiiiiiiiy f4. However, this is another
a win, or does not know the best position where the 1989 Nunn
lines, this often creates winning 18...f5? book (see page 26) has been
chances for Black too. For the purposes of this overturned by 21 xa6! This
Apart from the possibility survey only, I give this as the move, given as losing by Nunn
already mentioned (19 f1 h3, main line here because it has and most earlier authorities, is
which is in Part 1 of the survey) been played very frequently actually playable and may even
White normally plays 19 axb5 and most books give this as the be winning for White because
axb5 and now, since 20 xd5 main line. 21...f4 22 xf4 h3 is not a
can be answered by 20...xd5 However, we think the f- refutation at all: White can sac-
there are three main possibilities pawn move has been refuted rifice his Queen by 23 xe6.
for White. There was a vogue in recent years. Many of the old See the annotated game Ivan-
for 20 e4 during the 1990s positions formerly considered chuk-Short and the survey by
but Black seems to have found by theoreticians under 18 a4 Martin Bennedik. Ivanchuk did
a reliable drawing line against f5 can be (and in practice often not follow up correctly but later
this (see Part 1 of the survey). are) still reached via 18 f1 h5 games and analysis show Black
The move 20 f1, intending 19 a4 f5. could be in trouble here.
to place the queen on g2, is Apart from 18...h5! and There are some other inter-
15 The Total Marshall
esting possibilities in the last discovered the move in the late bxa4 or via 18 f1. Then in
diagram position. 21 f4 is per- 80s, but could not come to recent years, grandmasters have
fectly playable, transposing to a definitive conclusion then. found out about the Quigley
the Old Main Line.21 c4 is prob- It must however be said that Bust on the grapevine so there
ably not a good way for White Quigley was not the only one have been no high level takers
to avoid the Old Main Line. See to discover this move, and more for 18...f5 in recent years.
Martin Bennediks survey where important to discover the piece
he develops John Nunns 1989 sacrifice 19...f4 20 xf4. The Despite the strength of the
opinion that 21...xe3 is prob- whole line had been success- Quigley line, it is still necessary
ably a better choice for Black, fully played in correspondence to examine the old alternative
giving chances to win. games by Andreas Uhlig in 1987 19 f1, because it leads to posi-
21 f3!? remains to be refuted and 1995. And probably some tions that frequently come about
by some keen analyst. Is the grandmasters like Spassky and through other move orders.
obvious reply 21...h3 actually Adams, who never played the 19...h5
the best? In the 1995 ICC com- move order with 18...f5, may Of course this position can
puter game Ferret-Crafty, the have discovered the move also arise via 18 f1 h5 19
play was awful: Whites 22 f2? also. a4 f5, which is how many of
should have been answered by The Quigley idea was publi- the games in the line did in fact
22...f4! but see my notes. cised in my Chess Mail magazine develop.
White should have dared to play and one of my columns in The XIIIIIIIIY
22 xa6 with the idea -c4-e3 Kibitzer series at The Chess Caf 9-+-+-trk+0
and its not so clear that Black website; gradually it has become 9+-+-+-zpp0
is doing well unless a concrete better known and the analysis 9p+pvlr+-+0
tactical solution can be found. has firmed up. 9+p+n+p+q0
Now it is time to look at the For the details on 19 axb5, 9P+-zP-+l+0
famous position arising after 18 see the Bennedik survey of 9+LzP-vL-zP-0
a4 f5. the Quigley Bust variation. To 9-zP-sN-zP-zP0
XIIIIIIIIY summarise, 19...f4?! is the move 9tR-+-tRQmK-0
9-+-+-trk+0 that was supposed to refute 19 xiiiiiiiiy
9+-+-+-zpp0 axb5; Black does an alterna-
9p+pvlr+-+0 tive in 19...axb5 but it does not 20 f4
9+p+n+p+-0 look good. However, after 19 White usually wants to stop
9P+-zP-+l+0 axb5 f4 Quigley found 20 xf4 Black from playing ...f4 but there
9+LzPQvL-zPq0 xf4 21 xe6 xe6 and here are two other possibilities.
9-zP-sN-zP-zP0 Bennedik in his survey shows a) 20 axb5!? may cause a few
9tR-+-tR-mK-0 two lines giving White good problems, but (as often happens
xiiiiiiiiy winning chances: 22 bxa6 is the in the Marshall when a rare
clearer line while after 22 bxc6 move wins a game for White)
19 f1? xd2 23 xd2 f4 24 xe6+ maybe it is just a question of
This move is historically xe6 the complications should doing more thorough analysis
important but White really favour White but the play is than was hitherto thought nec-
ought to play 19 axb5!. The more difficult. Our annotated essary. In the games that White
strength of this move, which game Oliveira-Maffei is quite won, he only seemed to get a
is not even mentioned in most instructive. tiny edge but Black had no clear
books, depends on a subse- I am quite often asked why draw or equalising line. In view
quent piece sacrifice for sev- this line has not appeared in of the improvement for Black in
eral pawns, which seems to be grandmaster games if it really is the 20 f4 g5 line, possibly White
correct. so strong? The answer is two- should play this if he can firm
Daniel J. Quigley published fold. In former days, it seems up some of the variations in my
his analysis of this move on to be the case that analysts notes to the games. Obviously
the internet in the newsgroup overlooked the possibility and Black wants to play 20...f4 here
rec.games.chess in an arti- anyway Spassky (in particular) but now you need to look at the
cle called Marshall Gambit: never played 18...f5; many of unclear game McKenna-Chan-
Busted! in 1998. Quigley stated the games in the Old Main Line dler, Mousessian-T.Andresen
in his article that he already had actually came about via 18 a4 and Kamergrauzis-Vitomskis.
The Total Marshall 16
XIIIIIIIIY
b) Once more 20 xd5 is and now 24...xe1+ (Seems 9-+-+-trk+0
possible. After 20...cxd5 (the better than 24...e2!? which 9+-+-+-zpp0
same position as can arise via may draw, but not so surely.) 9p+pvlr+-+0
17...Re6 18 Bxd5 cxd5 19 a4 f5 25 xe1 xe1+ 26 xe1 e8 9+-+n+p+q0
20 Qf1 Qh5) 21 f4 bxa4 returns 27 f2 h6! (27...b8? 28 c4 9R+-zP-zPl+0
to the line below, but White can V.Agzamov-G.Agzamov) 28 9+LzP-vL-zP-0
also play 21 axb5 when Black xd6 (28 g2 e2 29 c4 9-zP-sN-+-zP0
(as we show in my Exchange xf4 30 gxf4 h3+! mating) 9+-+-tRQmK-0
on d5 survey) has to be careful 28...e2. xiiiiiiiiy
to get a draw, as the old theory XIIIIIIIIY
is unsound. 9-+-+-+-mk0 This Old Main Line stem
20...bxa4 9+-+-+-zp-0 position is like a railway junc-
Although this is the time- 9p+-wQ-+-zp0 tion because many routes lead
honoured move, probably it is 9+-+-+p+-0 to it and many departures lead
not best and Black should play 9p+-zP-zPl+0 from it. Black now has the well-
20...g5 instead! This line has 9+-zP-+-zP-0 known choice between
been radically improved for 9-zP-sNqvL-zP0
Black. 21 axb5 axb5 22 xd5 9+-+-+-mK-0 A: 21...g5?!
(This is the critical line as oth- xiiiiiiiiy B: 21...h8
erwise the draw soon becomes C: 21...b8 and
self-evident. If 22 fxg5 f4! see Here Nunn commented that: D: 21...fe8.
Loginov-Yerofeev) 22...cxd5 Surprisingly enough, White
(This can arise by transposition cannot avoid a draw despite Black is in trouble in all these
from the Exchange on d5 lines.) his large material advantage. to varying degrees.
23 g2 fe8 24 xd5 f7 25 Indeed White can easily make
a8 g7 26 xe8 xe8= ECO, a fatal error, as the following A: 21...g5?!
following Matsukevich-Staruk. shows: The oldest version of the
On the other hand, the 1960s 29 f1 (This led to a draw in OML. It was already consid-
line 20...fe8? is discredited two games from Matsukevichs ered refuted by Nunn in 1989
because of 21 axb5 xe3 22 1983 100game correspondence and there is not much more to
xe3 xe3 and now 23 bxc6!+- simultaneous in the Marshall, say about it.
as in Gurvich-Grzeskowiak; 23 but he should have lost one of 22 xa6! gxf4 (22...h8? was
bxa6? is inferior because of them!) 29...h3! 30 b8+? (30 refuted in Schuler-Hallier.) 23
23...b8 24 a7 xa7 25 xa7 e3! d3 31 f8+ h7 32 g2 xf4! (The older 23 xc6 is not
when published grandmaster seems to end in a draw by repe- to be feared.) 23...xf4 24 xe6!
theory was overthrown in 1972 tition after 32...e4 33 e1 e2 (24 xc6 e3+ 25 xe3 xe3
by 25...h6!= Suetin-im. 34 g2 etc.) 30...h7 31 e3 26 xd5+ h8 led to a draw in
21 xa4 d3!+ (Threatens mate start- Tal-Geller, 1975). This is the
The alternative yet again is 21 ing ...b1+) 32 g2 and now problem for Black.
xd5 cxd5; this is an impor- in Matsukevich-Shevchenko, After 24...xd2 25 xd5!
tant position because, even Black (and subsequent com- cxd5 26 g2 Nunn, 1989, com-
though it does not represent mentators) missed the win: mented: There are no visible
best play for either side after 18 32...b1+! 33 e1 a3! very improvements... so this must
f1 or 18 a4, it can also arise neatly exploiting a pin on the be considered the refutation of
by transposition from the lines b2-pawn. Finally, Black won 21...g5.
where White makes an earlier a game like this in Ernst-Sam- See Hauptmann-Sieberg in
exchange at d5. malvuo, Osterkars 1995. the database. Four subsequent
However, Black has a clear games in the database con-
draw. Since 22 xa4? e8 is a Returning to the position after firmed this line wins for White.
well-known trap, White must 21 xa4, we are now in what I
play 22 g2 fe8 (22...e4 call the Old Main Line, which B: 21...h8!? 22 xd5!
also comes into consideration; was really established as such in This is logical and seems to be
although it may be less reliable; the mid-1970s by the first edi- necessary. After 22 c4 xf4!?
see the annotated game Muller- tion of ECO. Black has tried a 23 xf4 xf4 24 xe6 (24
Racoce) 23 xd5 h8 24 f2 wide variety of moves now. gxf4? h3) 24...h3+!! leads
17 The Total Marshall
XIIIIIIIIY
to incredible complications: this 9-tr-+-+k+0 can force a good endgame with
is an important idea if it works! 9+-+-+-zpp0 an extra pawn, maybe that is not
See the annotated game Milvy- 9p+pvlr+-+0 the right conclusion to draw.
das-Muravyev, corr 1994. 9+-+n+p+q0 22 f2!
22...cxd5 23 xa6 9R+-zP-zPl+0 As pointed out by Nunn in
XIIIIIIIIY 9+LzP-vL-zP-0 1989, this is the critical reply.
9-+-+-tr-mk0 9-zP-sN-+-zP0 a) 22 c4? fails to 22...xf4!.
9+-+-+-zpp0 9+-+-tRQmK-0 b) 22 xa6 is fine for Black:
9R+-vlr+-+0 xiiiiiiiiy 22...xe3 23 xe3 xe3 24
9+-+p+p+q0 xc6 e8 25 xd5+ f8 see
9-+-zP-zPl+0 22 xd5 (If 22 f2!? e2! the annotated game Dragunov-
9+-zP-vL-zP-0 but 22 xa6!? may not be as Konstantinopolsky where the
9-zP-sN-+-zP0 bad as was thought, although important variations are given.
9+-+-tRQmK-0 it allows Black to carry out his White can draw by 26 xd6! or
xiiiiiiiiy threat.) 22...cxd5 23 xa6! (23 even with the perilous 26 e4?!
g2 is not dangerous although it if he finds all the right moves
This critical position can also is often played; 23 b3 is at best thereafter.
arise from the Classical Pawn a draw for White and maybe 22...g5
Push via 16...Rae8 17 Nd2 f5 not even that.) 23...e8 (Rec- XIIIIIIIIY
18 f4 Kh8 19 Bxd5 cxd5 20 Qf1 ommended by Nunn in 1989 9-+-+r+k+0
Qh5 21 a4 bxa4 22 Rxa4 Re6 23 instead of the old line 23...be8 9+-+-+-+p0
Rxa6. when 24 b5! refutes Blacks 9p+pvlr+-+0
Black has tried several moves system.) 24 f2! when Black 9+-+n+pzpq0
here but only one is any good: may be able to hold but this is 9R+-zP-zPl+0
23...fe8!. not exactly a Marshall players 9+LzP-vL-zP-0
(Nunn treats this position dream position. Best may be 9-zP-sN-wQ-zP0
as a transposition to the line 24...xe1! (24...d7!?) 25 xe1 9+-+-tR-mK-0
21...Rfe8 22 Rxa6 Kh8 23 Bxd5 d7 26 a1 g5 (Ryabikin- xiiiiiiiiy
cxd5. However, we think it Vitomskis) needs more inves-
properly belongs here as a criti- tigation. From this position two major
cal line for 21...Kh8 whereas in variations have developed in
that sub-variation Black has the D: 21...fe8 recent years.
strong move 22...Rxe3). This is the principal variation 23 fxg5!
Now if White wants to play of the Old Main Line now. This is the main line in ECO
for a win, he should probably XIIIIIIIIY but the follow-up they give is
opt for 24 b5! which grabs a 9-+-+r+k+0 possibly not Whites best plan.
second pawn and challenges 9+-+-+-zpp0 23 xa6 is the alternative, but
Black to find concrete com- 9p+pvlr+-+0 it seems OK for Black: 23...gxf4
pensation. 9+-+n+p+q0 24 gxf4 h8 25 xd5 (25 xc6
He needs an improvement 9R+-zP-zPl+0 xf4!) 25...cxd5 (This position
now. (24 f2 won for White in 9+LzP-vL-zP-0 has been played a lot in the past
Arppi-Lyly, corr 1996, but Black 9-zP-sN-+-zP0 decade, including correspond-
went wrong on move 27 in that 9+-+-tRQmK-0 ence and computer games.) 26
game.) 24...h6!? 25 f1 f3 26 xiiiiiiiiy f1 and now 26...h3! is strong;
c1 f8 27 e3 e4 (Unzicker- the idea is ...g4, h7-h5-h4
Nunn) 28 b3! and Black cannot In some articles on his gambit which comes quicker than in
equalise. website, Dr Thomas Stock calls the 26...g8 line, proposed by
this the Sleeping Beauty Vari- Nunn.
C: 21...b8!? ation (Dornrschenvariante) The onus is on White to prove
This threatens ...xb3 but but I am not sure why...The he can draw here. He managed
the move may waste time current state of theory appears it in Sanakoev-Buj, 14th CC
and again Blacks position to be that it is more playable for World Ch Final 1994-98, but
becomes uncomfortable. Nev- Black than the alternatives, but many other games in our data-
ertheless, this line may be just in view of the discovery (at the base were won by Black.
about playable for Black. end of the survey) that White 23...f4 24 gxf4 h3
The Total Marshall 18
A good line for White...is tion in the Old Main Line would However, the line so far lacks
hard to find wrote Nunn in be healthy after all. any high-level tests.
1989. Some tries can be found Other 25th moves for White 28...xg5 29 xa6! xg3+
in the database. It seems that are not dangerous. 25 h1?! has 30 hxg3 e6 31 f2 xe1+
Whites position is apparently been played in about 40 games 32 xe1 c7 33 xe6+
better than he thought. and results are not encouraging xe6
25 c4!! for White. 25 xa6!? seems to be After a sequence virtually
XIIIIIIIIY a drawing line. forced since 25 c4!, Black
9-+-+r+k+0 25...xf4 has to grovel in an endgame
9+-+-+-+p0 This is obvious but doesnt a pawn down; White won in
9p+pvlr+-+0 quite work for Black. Nemec-Talla.
9+-+n+-zPq0 26 e5 xe5 27 dxe5 xe5
9R+NzP-zP-+0 28 g3 However, even in the Old
9+LzP-vL-+l0 XIIIIIIIIY Main Line fails for Black, joining
9-zP-+-wQ-zP0 9-+-+r+k+0 the Quigley bust and Ivanchuk-
9+-+-tR-mK-0 9+-+-+-+p0 Short lines in the recycle bin, it
xiiiiiiiiy 9p+p+-+-+0 must be remembered that White
9+-+ntr-zPq0 cannot force any of these disad-
This could be a critical 9R+-+-+-+0 vantageous lines on Black.
move. White hopes to simplify 9+LzP-vL-wQl0 Black should meet 18 a4 by
to a won endgame, exploiting 9-zP-+-+-zP0 18...h5!. With the Spassky
the wrecked black queenside. 9+-+-tR-mK-0 Variation and several of the
Therefore Black needs a con- xiiiiiiiiy other improvements on the
crete attacking continuation but way, there is no need for Black
despite his apparently promis- The crunch. Black is still to end up in such a bad position.
ing build-up it is hard to find a pawn down, his is in an With the theoretical best play,
anything. However, this is an awkward pin, his is no safer a draw is still the right result
important position if something than Whites and his queenside and Black gets a lot of winning
can be found then Blacks posi- pawns are about to drop off. opportunities.
a re-examination of the plans Black Spassky played a third move, begin until move 16, 19 or even well
was adopting in the 11...c6 line. He 18...h5. beyond move 20. Nunn, especially,
was not the only player adopting Spassky variation has a codified the main lines in great
that sort of approach in the somewhat wimpish reputation detail in his 1989 book, which
occasional game (e.g. Bob Wades which we believe is unjustified. included a lot of new analysis, and
draw with Fischer at Havana 1964), Superficially, the move gives far demonstrated fairly clearly which
but Spassky made the Marshall the fewer winning chances than the lines were considered playable (at
lynch-pin of his strategy in his 1965 other moves but actually it makes that time) and which were analysed
candidates match against ex-world it virtually impossible for White to to death. His book (in which Tim
champion Mikhail Tal. achieve any significant advantage. Harding wrote the chapters on the
In that match, Spassky made By minimizing concessions on the lines other than 11...c6, and the
three draws with Black from queenside, Black actually retains anti-Marshalls) also included a
three outings with the Marshall prospects of keeping control of the good deal of original analysis and
and so laid the basis for winning whole board rather than allowing correction of mistakes by earlier
the match with White. Spassky the game to degenerate to a race theoreticians. It essentially drew a
had played the Marshall twice between Black on the kingside and line under all that had gone before
previously so no doubt Tal had White on the queenside. Of course and for a time there was less
prepared something for it, but the it is fun to attack the kingside but interest in the Marshall main lines
future world champion unveiled the sharper lines are more suited to among professional players.
two prepared improvements on blitz play or defeating lower-rated Developments in the 1990s
known theory in this match: both opposition, while the subtler play included the Adams variation which
solid positional moves to which Tal after 18...h5 is more suited to the young British GM employed
could find no answer. correspondence play and slower- to defeat Ivanchuk at Terrassa
In Game 1, Tal met 11...c6 12 paced over-the-board contests. in 1961: after 11 xe5 c6 12 d4
d4 d6 by the standard 13 e1 18...h5 is by no means totally d6 13 e1 h4 14 g3 h3
h4 14 g3 h3 15 e3 g4 drawish. More than three decades 15 e3 g4 16 d3 ae8 17
16 d3 ae8 17 d2 e6 18 have passed and there is still no d2 instead of the usual 17...e6
a4 (see diagram). This move by model game for White to follow he accidentally introduced a new
White, opening a second front and play for a win. Many players plan beginning 17...h5 which
on the queenside with a view do not know what the most critical was further refined in later games.
to disrupting Blacks attack and lines against it really are. White For White, interest started to
creating a passed pawn, had been can easily become frustrated and concentrate on lines in which White
introduced to master play only get into a lost position after a few develops his rook at e4, to reduce
in 1963 (except for a couple of moves. Blacks chances of kingside play.
forgotten games played by Dake In Game 3, Tal avoided the The line 11 xe5 c6 12 d4 d6
in Poland in the late 1930s). Marshall while in Games 5 and 7, 13 e1 h4 14 g3 h3 15 e4
XIIIIIIIIY he switched to the Kevitz variation had had a brief vogue in the early
which he had earlier played against 1970s but never established itself.
9-+-+-trk+0 the Estonian master, Aarne Herm- Now it has made a come-back
9+-+-+pzpp0 lin. Spassky was ready for this too: and the analogous line with 12 d3
9p+pvlr+-+0 after 12 xd5 cxd5 13 d4 d6 where the pawn protects the rook
9+p+n+-+-0 14 e3 he played 14...h4 15 h3
and now introduced the novelty has also become one of the most
9P+-zP-+l+0 15...f4. Both these games were important lines in the Marshall.
9+LzPQvL-zPq0 drawn too. Other developments since the
9-zP-sN-zP-zP0 After Spasskys success with the 1989 book by Nunn and Harding
9tR-+-tR-mK-0 Marshall in this match, he played include revivals of the Kevitz and
xiiiiiiiiy some more games with it and other the 12 e2 lines, and some new
grandmasters, notably Geller but ideas for White in the 12 d4/ 15 e4
In Novopashin-Spassky, 31 st even Tal himself, were seen on line. Most significant of all, perhaps
USSR Ch (1963), Spassky had the black side. (and never before published in a
replied 18...bxa4, which attempts The Marshall really achieved book) is the refutation of the line
to buy time to pursue the kingside recognition at this point as an 18 a4 f5 which many books still
attack. Around the same time, attacking line suitable for use give as the main line of the whole
A.M. Konstantinopolsky and some anywhere from amateur friendlies Marshall. However, as you will
correspondence players introduced to the highest level of grandmaster see when you read the detailed
the aggressive but dubious reply play. material on the 18 a4 line, Black
18...f5, which most theory books The Marshall then became a can comfortably side-step these
today still consider to be the main mature opening variation having problems and obtain a good game
line. No doubt Tal had some ideas several set lines of play where with Spasskys 18...h5.
for White in both these lines, but master games often did not really
21 The Total Marshall
The Internet era and provoke mistakes. few years ago were primarily the
In our Marshall database there preserve of professional players,
General chess competitive chess writers and the wealthy.
conditions have changed a are more than a thousand games,
for example, played at the Internet Internet downloads and cheap
lot since the era of five hour CD-Rom products now make
master tournament sessions with Chess Club. Many of these were
decided by gross errors, with the large numbers of games available
adjournment after 40 moves. In to almost everyone. The impact of
the late 1990s and early years of loser (and sometimes the winner
too) making mistakes whose this development is particularly
the 21st century, the game has been noticeable in correspondence play,
speeded up. This makes sharp refutation was discovered and
published long ago. However, where the contestants have always
openings like the Marshall even been able to consult books and
more effective than they were many strong masters practice and
experiment at the ICC and other other printed reference sources but
before. Nowadays, games are rarely now can consult databases too.
adjourned but instead are played to chess servers which means that
a proportion of these games test A word of warning: judging a
a finish, often with a fast rate of play move by its statistical performance
after 40 or 60 moves. A lot of master critical positions at the cutting
edge of Marshall theory. The same in your database is particularly
chess and high-level amateur chess hazardous in an opening like the
is played at rapid rates, often with goes for many of the games played
between computer programs in Marshall where one good new
blitz play-offs to decide ties, and idea may overturn a variation that
most Internet play is blitz. recent years.
One of the most important has scored heavily for one side in
These conditions favour the the past.
re-emergence of sharp openings theoretical discoveries in the
Marshall in the past decade was Free resources like The Week In
like the Marshall, as somewhat Chess web magazine make it much
unsound moves now have a much first published in an Internet
newsgroup (discussion board). easier, quicker and cheaper for the
greater chance of success when ordinary player to see new master
the opponent has limited time This was American expert Dan
Quigleys important idea on how trends. A few years ago, it was only
to calculate. The new conditions the games of top GMs that traveled
also put an even greater premium to meet 18 a4 f5. See the theoretical
section for details. the world quickly. Nowadays, an
on advance preparation and the important new idea played in an
discovery of novelties or forgotten Another difference in recent
years is the wide availability of international open or national
ideas which can shock the championship can be known to
opponent, gain time on the clock game databases which until a
everyone within 10 days.
MegaCorr3 CD-ROM
To learn more about our plans in future read Chess Mail magazine
and www.chessmail.com
The Total Marshall 22
Game 1 the main line and Marshall also The knight cannot be safely
Jose Raoul Capablanca (Cuba) pioneered the 11...b7 and 9...e4 captured:
Frank J. Marshall (USA) variations. Indicative of the tactical difficulty
Manhattan Chess Club Ch New 12 e1 of the variation is that Capablanca
York, 1918 Capablanca held back the obvious himself published an incorrect
(A synthesis of notes from many advance d2-d4, hoping to sidetrack refutation of 14 hxg4 h4 15
sources) Marshall from the main lines of his f3 viz. 15...h2+? (15...h2+! is
1 e4 e5 2 f3 c6 3 b5 a6 4 preparation. Later, however, many correct, as demonstrated by GM
a4 f6 5 00 e7 6 e1 b5 7 masters believed that the rook Shamkovich in the 1950s: 16 f1
b3 00 8 c3 d5 would be better placed for defence xg4 17 e4 f4! 18 g3 h2!+)
XIIIIIIIIY on e2, protecting f2, in which case 16 f1 xg4 17 xg4 h1+ 18
9r+lwq-trk+0 12 d4 would be the right move. e2 ae8+ (Capablanca) 19 e6!!
12...d6 xe6+ 20 xe6+- E.Palkin, 1954.
9+-zp-vlpzpp0 The variation usually leads to an 14...h4
9p+n+-sn-+0 open, attacking game for Black Now Capablanca transposed to
9+p+pzp-+-0 and that is undoubtedly why I what later became the main line.
9-+-+P+-+0 prefer it to the close, defensive lines 15 d4
9+LzP-+N+-0 against the Ruy Lopez opening. 15 hxg4? transposes to the previous
Black gives up a pawn to obtain variation.
9PzP-zP-zPPzP0 a strong attack against the white 15...xf2
9tRNvLQtR-mK-0 king. However, this does not state XIIIIIIIIY
xiiiiiiiiy the whole case in favour of the 9r+l+-trk+0
variation. It is not just one of those
This was the first time that Marshall attacks which White can weather 9+-zp-+pzpp0
unleashed his idea in a master by good defence and end up a 9p+-vl-+-+0
tournament, after the end of pawn to the good. There is more 9+p+-+-+-0
World War I. He had been saving to it than that. 9-+-zP-+-wq0
it for some years, in the meantime The pawn sacrifice can be justified 9+LzP-+Q+P0
playing the Petroff Defence. on purely positional grounds. In
In Chess Review 3/1943, Marshall other words, Whites opening leaves 9PzP-+-snP+0
looked back on his experience his queenside underdeveloped 9tRNvL-tR-mK-0
with his innovation: I had been and Black can capitalize on this xiiiiiiiiy
analysing the variation for many lack of development. If White
years and came to the conclusion just tries to block the attack, Black This move is the main point of
that the attack must be sound. I am can continue with comparatively Blacks build-up but as it seems
still of the same opinion. By this I quiet moves and obtain adequate to lead to a lost position, attempts
do not mean that Black necessarily positional compensation for the were made to find an alternative.
wins; I merely claim that the attack pawn sacrifice. 15...h5 (Shamkovich) is the best try
gives Black many winning chances 13 h3 but does not quite equalise.
and should be good for at least a Imprecise; 13 d4 is more accurate. 16 e2
draw. 9 exd5 xd5 13...g4 Capablancas choice, which is good
Actually, I lost my game against XIIIIIIIIY enough for White. Later analysis
Capablanca. The first attempt 9r+lwq-trk+0 showed that a possibly superior
failed. With admirable courage 9+-zp-+pzpp0 continuation is 16 d2! as in the
and skill, Capa accepted my pawn intercity match Rostov v Pensa.
sacrifices and defeated the attack, 9p+-vl-+-+0 16...g4
although playing against a prepared 9+p+-+-+-0 16...g4 (once given as an
variation he had never seen before. 9-+-+-+n+0 equalising line by ECO) is crushed
However, the result of one game 9+LzP-+-+P0 by 17 g3! (found by former US
is not sufficient to judge the true 9PzP-zP-zPP+0 champion John Grefe).
merits of a new variation and I 17 hxg4
used the attack in many subsequent 9tRNvLQtR-mK-0 17 xf2? g3 18 hxg4 at best draws
games, with varying success. In xiiiiiiiiy for White (18 f1 xe2 19 xe2
these games, I continually tried ae8+).
different moves, seeking the best This offer is a recurring theme 17...h2+
combination. in the 11...f6 variation, but in this 17...g3 18 xf2 h2+ 19 f1
10 xe5 xe5 11 xe5 f6 particular position other moves h1+ 20 e2 reaches the same
After this game, Marshall recognised might be considered, for example position as after Whites 19th move
that he had perhaps not chosen the 13...f5!? has been tried. in the 17...h2+ line.
best variation. Later 11...c6 became 14 f3 18 f1 g3
23 The Total Marshall
Black appears to have created bxc3 32 xc3 b4 33 b6 xc3 18... f4 see Lehikoinen-Sarink,
numerous threats but his attack 34 xc3 h6 35 b7 e3 36 below.) 19...h5 or good for
has peaked and White simplifies xf7+! 10 White (19...fe8?? 20 xd6!+-;
to a winning position. Whites And in view of inevitable mate, 19...d8!?).
well-placed queen and pressure Black resigned: 36...xf7 (36...h7 13...d6 14 e2
against f7 enable him to cope with 37 f5+ h8 38 xh6#) 37 b8+ 14 xd5 b7 15 xd6 e7+
the dangers. h7 38 xh6+ xh6 (38...gxh6 39 threatening mate in one, the
19 xf2 xf7#) 39 h8+ g6 40 h5#. An queen and (for good measure) the
XIIIIIIIIY historic game! also.
14 e1 e8 (14...g5 does not
9r+-+-trk+0 Game 2 work here because the c1 is
9+-zp-+pzpp0 J.Battell defended and White can play 15
9p+-+-+-+0 Frank Marshall d4.) 15 xe8+ (White has back rank
9+p+-+-+-0 New York, 1937 problems as usual in the lines with
9-+-zP-+Pwq0 Notes by Marshall, Harding. an early f3.) 15...xe8 16 e3
1 e4 e5 2 f3 c6 3 b5 a6 4 f5 17 d4 f4 18 xe8+ xe8 19
9+LzP-+Qvl-0 a4 f6 5 00 e7 6 e1 b5 7 e3 xe3 20 fxe3 xe3 and Black
9PzP-+-tRP+0 b3 00 8 c3 d5 9 exd5 xd5 regains his pawn with a much
9tRNvL-+K+-0 10 xe5 xe5 11 xe5 c6 superior endgame.
xiiiiiiiiy XIIIIIIIIY 14...g5 15 h3
White has to prevent...g4.
9r+lwq-trk+0 15...f5
This is the stock position White 9+-+-vlpzpp0
should aim for in the Capablanca- XIIIIIIIIY
Marshall line. Black has swindling 9p+p+-+-+0 9r+-+-trk+0
chances only. 19 e1 might be 9+p+ntR-+-0 9+-+-+pzpp0
better said Capablanca. 19...h6 is 9-+-+-+-+0 9p+-vl-+-+0
unclear, claimed Golombek, but 9+LzP-+-+-0
20 d2, 20 e3 and 20 d2 are all 9+p+p+lwq-0
9PzP-zP-zPPzP0 9-+-+-+-+0
promising for White. (19...ae8?? 20
xf7+ Capablanca). 9tRNvLQ+-mK-0 9+-zP-+Q+P0
19...h1+ 20 e2 xf2? xiiiiiiiiy 9PzP-zPRzPP+0
20...xc1 makes White work 9tRNvL-+-mK-0
harder for the win. 21 xg3! (21 Marshall pioneered this move also,
xf7+? could even have lost for though he may not have been the xiiiiiiiiy
White in Yates-OHanlon, played first to play it. In My 50 Years of
a few years later.) 21...xb2+ 22 Chess Marshall recommended this 16 e1?
d3! xa1 23 c2 b4 24 g5!+- move. I have made some changes White decides he would like to
Tartakower, proved many years in my variation of the Ruy Lopez... play d4 after all, and so he wastes a
later in an English postal game Here our analysis deviates from tempo. He stands worse anyway.
Bird-Beckett. previous play. In this position, He might as well have grabbed
21 d2! 11...f6 and 11...b7 have hitherto the second pawn by 16 xd5
Black must retreat his and White been played. We now recommend (met by 16...h5 or 16...ad8)
gains a decisive tempo. The sequel the following: 11...c6! 12 d4 d6 or else played a3 to get some
proves yet again that Bishop, Knight 13 e1 h4! 14 g3 h3 15 xd5 development.
and the initiative beat a Rook. Once cxd5... 16...ae8 17 f1?
Black runs out of momentum, he 12 xd5 cxd5 13 f3?! From bad to worse. White loses the
must lose. 21...h4 22 h3 Naive and plausible. This line is exchange.
ae8+ 23 d3 f1+ 24 c2 generally reckoned to be bad for 17...e4 18 xe4 xe4 19 a3
f2 25 f3 g1 White. Frank Marshall comfortably e5 20 c2 h2 21 e3
25...e2 has been refuted in various beat this amateur who played this Black can now pick his favourite
ways. A recent Russian book on against him. way to win.
Capablanca gives 26 a4! (26 a3 13 d4 d6 14 e1 h4 15 g3 h3 21...f4 22 b3 xe3 23 fxe3
was the line, also attrributed to 16 f3 f5! was the main line of fe8 24 e2 8e6 25 d3 4e5
Capablanca, given in Golombeks Marshalls analysis. 17 xd5 White 26 d2 g5
book: 26...xd2+ 27 xd2 xa1 28 carries out his threat and takes the The rest is silence.
xf2 xb2+ 29 c2 c5 30 d5) second pawn; other moves are 27 e1 f6 28 g3 xg3 01
26...e1 27 axb5 e3? 28 c4 not reckoned to be dangerous.
(28 xe3! Khalifman, Yudasin) 17...ae8 18 d2 but now (18 Game 3
28...xd2+ 29 xd2 xd2+ 30 b3 xe8? xe8 19 d2 e4 and A. Dulanto (Peru)
axb5? 31 xf7+! Capablanca. Black should win. was Marshalls C.H.OD. Alexander (England)
26 d5 c5 27 dxc5 xc5 28 b4 analysis.) 18...e6 (Marshall, Buenos Aires ol prelim-A bd.1,
d6 American Chess Review, March 1939
28...e3 29 xe3 xe3 30 d2 1943) is looking dubious after Marshall, Alexander, Harding.
xa1 31 xe3. 19 a3! (Heemsoth, Fernschach 1 e4 e5 2 f3 c6 3 b5 a6 4
29 a4! a5 30 axb5 axb4 31 a6 10/1960; for the probably superior a4 f6 5 00 e7 6 e1 b5 7
The Total Marshall 24
Good and simple, based on correct White is now clearly better and 31...g2+ 32 h1 ee2.
calculation of the subsequent starts to break out. 31...xf2 32 a7 h6 33 c4 g2+
exchanges, but Black could have 27...f6 28 c4 dxc4 29 b4 34 h1 h2+ 35 g1 g2!
defended better next move. 27 e5 e8 30 xe8+ xe8 31 xd6 Black naturally has an easy draw
is the computers preference. xd6 32 e5 d5 33 e1 by perpetual check. He prefers to
27...xf4? xe5 34 xe5 g6 35 f1 g4 make a winning attempt, with a
This allows White to carry out his 36 hxg4 hxg4 37 fxg4 d7 38 really astounding point.
idea. xf4 xg4 39 xg4+ xg4 36 a8 f3 37 xe8+ h7
27...fxe6 28 xd2 d5 29 xd5 40 e3+- XIIIIIIIIY
exd5 30 axb5 axb5. White has a sound extra pawn and 9-+-+Q+-+0
28 e2! f3 the black cannot attack Whites
queenside. Now White will bring 9+-+-+-zpk0
28...xg3 fails to 29 xg2.
29 xf3 fxe6 30 e1 the King into play. 9-+p+-+-zp0
Threatening to win the black queen 40...e2 41 g1 a5 42 f2 d3 9+-+-+-+-0
with a bishop fork. 43 e1 f7 44 d2 e4 45 g3 9-+NzP-+-+0
30...f6 31 xf4 xf4 32 d3 46 b3 e6 47 bxc4 bxc4 48 9+-zP-+lvl-0
xe6+ xe6 33 xe6 f6 34 c3 e2 49 xc4 a4 50 e3
b5 51 b4 e8 52 c5 h5 9-zP-vL-+-tr0
xf6 gxf6 35 axb5 axb5
White has a comfortably won 53 c4 10 9tR-+R+-mK-0
endgame. xiiiiiiiiy
36 f2 f7 37 f3 e6 38 e4 Game 8
f5+ 39 f4 d5 40 xf5 c4 A.Chomsky White has a and extra, but mate
41 g4 hxg4 42 xg4 b3 43 h4 E.L. Abelmann is threatened on h1!
xb2 44 h5 xc3 45 h6 10 Shakmaty-222 corr USSR, 1955 38 g6+!
1 e4 e5 2 f3 c6 3 b5 a6 4 The only move.
Game 7 a4 f6 5 00 e7 6 e1 b5 7 38...xg6 39 e5+ xe5 40
Abe Yanofsky (CAN) b3 00 8 c3 d5 9 exd5 xd5 10 dxe5 h1+ 41 f2 xd1 42
Edward Lasker (USA) xe5 xe5 11 xe5 c6 12 f1 xd1 xd1 43 b4 f5 44 c4
USA ch Corpus Christi, 1947 d6 13 e1 h4 14 g3 h5 15 b3 45 c3 g5 46 b5
Notes by Tim Harding. d4 h3!
1 e4 e5 2 f3 c6 3 b5 a6 4 Pachmans recommendation. Game 9
a4 f6 5 00 e7 6 e1 b5 7 16 d3 f5 17 f1 h3 18 L.A. Fink
b3 00 8 c3 d5 9 exd5 xd5 d1 B. Kantorovich
10 xe5 xe5 11 xe5 c6 12 18 d3 could lead to repetition. USSR corr, 1955
xd5 cxd5 13 d4 d6 14 e3 18...f5 19 e2 ae8 20 e3 Heemsoths scrapbooks show this
f5 e6 game was played in a semifinal
This game shows the Kevitz XIIIIIIIIY of the 4th USSR Correspondence
Variation can blot out Blacks 9-+-+-trk+0 Championship and that the
counterplay if he chooses an 9+-+-+pzpp0 original notes by Kantorovich from
inferior line. Shakhmaty v SSSR 1/1956 were
14...h4 was later recognised to be 9p+pvlr+-+0 translated for a German publication
stronger. Then if 15 g3 g4 16 f3 9+p+n+q+-0 by H.Kretschmar.
Black has 16...xg3. 9-+-zP-+-+0 1 e4 e5 2 f3 c6 3 b5 a6 4
15 e1 f4 16 f3 9+-zP-vL-zPl0 a4 f6 5 00 e7 6 e1 b5 7
16 d2 transposes to the old main 9PzP-+QzP-zP0 b3 00 8 c3 d5 9 exd5 xd5 10
line of the Kevitz, 15 d2 f4 16 xe5 xe5 11 xe5 f6
e1. 9tRN+LtR-mK-0 Now and then, there are still people
16...g5 17 h1 d7 18 d2 xiiiiiiiiy willing to try the Original Marshall.
h4 19 f1 f5 White apparently chose not to
19...g5!? has been suggested (by White has gained a tempo over the follow the example of Capablanca
Gransson?). Maybe 19...ae8. 15 d3 f5 line. because he was misled by recent
20 e2 h5 21 e1 f6 22 21 c2 f4 22 xf5 xe2+ 23 analysis.
d2 f8 23 h3 f5 24 h2 h5 xe2 xf5 12 e1 d6 13 h3 g4 14 hxg4?
25 f2 f7 26 a3 g5 27 ae1 This game illustrates how Black can h4 15 f3
XIIIIIIIIY often have excellent play even after XIIIIIIIIY
9-+-+-trk+0 the queen exchange in the Marshall, 9r+l+-trk+0
especially when he has the bishop
9+-+l+q+-0 pair and control of the e-file. 9+-zp-+pzpp0
9p+-vl-+-+0 24 d2 fe8 25 a4 h3 26 a3 9p+-vl-+-+0
9+p+p+rzpp0 f5 27 dd1 f4! 28 d2 9+p+-+-+-0
9-+-zP-zp-+0 Naturally not 28 gxf4 g6+ 29 h1 9-+-+-+Pwq0
9zP-zP-+P+P0 g2+ and Black wins the exchange 9+LzP-+Q+-0
(A.Ptzsch, Fernschach).
9-zP-vLRwQPsN0 28...e2 29 axb5 fxg3 30 hxg3 9PzP-zP-zPP+0
9+-+-tR-+K0 xg3! 31 bxa6 9tRNvL-tR-mK-0
xiiiiiiiiy If 31 fxg3 White gets mated by xiiiiiiiiy
27 The Total Marshall
XIIIIIIIIY
24...e2?! 9-+-+r+k+0 g1 e4+ (or 24...h3+) 25 f1
After this, Blacks attack soon runs d3+ Goransson.
9+-+-+-+p0 22...fxe3 23 xe3
out of steam.
Instead, 24...h8! is correct; see 9p+-vlr+-+0 23 fxe3 Plunge-Bohringer.
Bravo-Jaime, below. 9+p+p+-zPq0 23...xe3
25 g2+ 9P+-zP-zpl+0 23...xe3 Szabo-Barczay.
25 f1 xf1 (25...f3 26 g3 9+-zP-vL-zP-0 24 fxe3 e7 25 e4!
g4 27 d7+!) 26 xe8 g4+ 27 This move and the continuation
9-zP-sN-wQ-zP0 to move 28 was recommended by
xf1 xf4+ 28 g1 xe8 29 f1
Gransson; 25 h1 also seems 9tR-+-tR-mK-0 Keres and others as an improvement
good for White. xiiiiiiiiy on Stein-Spassky, Moscow zt 1964,
25...h8 26 f2 g6+ 27 in which Black easily drew after 25
h1 24 xf4? xc6? g5!.
27 g3?? h6 28 h1 g8 29 24 gxf4! is unclear or a bit better 25...g5 26 exd5 xd2
f2 c6+. for White after 24...bxa4 (24...h6 26...e3+ 27 h1 f2 28 d6+ causes
27...c6+ (Botterill) but Nunn points out that a back rank disaster - Nunn.
Better is 27...e6. 25 gxh6 xh6 26 f1 transposes 27 dxc6+ h8 28 a1 g6
28 g2 e6 29 f1 c4 30 g3 to Grootjans-de Boer, where White 28...g5 is no better; see Schwartz-
d3 31 d2 c6+ 32 g1 f3 withstood the attack). Dahlhaus.
33 f2 g4 34 e5 h5 35 h3! 24...e2 25 xe2 xe2 26 29 d5 e3+ 30 h1 f2 31 c7
g6 xe2 Surely White should have been
35...xh3 36 h2 xh2+ 37 xh2 Sacrifices of the white queen for able to demonstrate a win from
h4 38 h1 and f2+-. rook, minor piece and assorted this position? But if so, where did
36 h2 h4 37 f1 h6 38 d2 pawns occur in many variations he go wrong?
xe5 39 dxe5 g8 40 g1 10. of the Marshall. Sometimes they 31...xb2 32 e1 xd4
Did Black lose on time? He might are good, sometimes not so good XIIIIIIIIY
have continued for a few more and sometimes they are played in 9-+-+-+-mk0
moves. desperation. 9+-zP-+-+p0
26...xe2 27 xd6 bxa4 28
Game 15 e1 b5 29 f4 g6 30 c1 9-+-+-+p+0
Herman Pilnik (ARG) b6 31 a1 d7 32 a2 9+-+L+-+-0
Efim Geller (UKR) XIIIIIIIIY 9-+-vl-+-+0
Santiago de Chile, 1965 9-+-+-+k+0 9+-zP-+-zPl0
1 e4 e5 2 f3 c6 3 b5 a6 4 9-tr-+-+-zP0
a4 f6 5 00 e7 6 e1 b5 7 9+-+l+-+p0
b3 00 8 c3 d5 9 exd5 xd5 9pwq-+-+-+0 9+-+-tR-+K0
10 xe5 xe5 11 xe5 c6 12 9+-+p+-zP-0 xiiiiiiiiy
d4 d6 13 e1 h4 14 g3 h3 9p+-zP-vL-+0
15 e3 g4 16 d3 ae8 17 9+-zP-+-zP-0 33 cxd4?
d2 e6 18 xd5 cxd5 19 f1 33 g4! xg4 34 cxd4 c2 35 e7 as
h5 20 f4 9RzP-sN-+-zP0 the white king can escape from the
Pilnik was apparently trying to 9+-+-+-mK-0 corner 35...f5 (35...h3 36 g1)
unsettle his opponent by minor xiiiiiiiiy 36 b7 d2 37 d5!+- White has the
transpositions of move order. wrong for the h-pawn so must
However, this move turns out to White has too many weaknesses. retain the d-pawn.
be a novelty. It is strange to play 32...b5 33 f2 g4 34 c4 dxc4 33...c2 34 f3 xc7 35 g1
f2-f4 before Black goes ...f7-f5. 35 e4 b3 36 c3 c2+ 37 g7 36 f2 h5 37 e2 c4 38
20...fe8 e1 a3 38 xa3 xb2 39 d6 d2 f6 39 d5 d7 40 b2 f5
20...g5?! was an extremely c1+ 40 f2 d2+ 01 41 e2 d4 42 b2 .
dubious suggestion published in Only a draw but a critical game
Granssons monograph: 21 fxg5 Game 16 between two top GMs in the early
f5 22 f4 e2 23 f2 (Better is Bruno Parma (Yugoslavia) theory of the Marshall.
23 xd6 xf1 24 xe6) 23...xf4 Boris Spassky (USSR)
24 xf4 h6+. This is very hard to Vrnjacka Banja, 1965 Game 17
believe! 1 e4 e5 2 f3 c6 3 b5 a6 4 Boris Spassky
21 f2 f5!? a4 f6 5 00 e7 6 e1 b5 7 Efim Geller
21...f5!= as in a game Zuidema- b3 00 8 c3 d5 9 exd5 xd5 2nd match game, Riga 1965
Nei. 10 xe5 xe5 11 xe5 c6 12 d4 1 e4 e5 2 f3 c6 3 b5 a6 4
22 a4 d6 13 e1 h4 14 g3 h3 15 a4 f6 5 00 e7 6 e1 b5 7
Gransson asked, Has there ever e3 g4 16 d3 ae8 17 d2 b3 00 8 c3 d5
been a game in this line where the e6 18 a4 bxa4 19 xa4 f5 20 This game is interesting as a clash
move a2-a4 was played so late? f1 f4?! between the two greatest Soviet
22...g5 After this game, it was realised that grandmasters to really know the
This is dubious. 22...bxa4!? was Black should play 20...h5. Marshall well. Spassky played the
advisable. 21 xh3 xh3 22 xa6! white pieces for once.
23 fxg5 f4 22 gxf4 g6+ 23 h1 g2+ 24 9 exd5 xd5 10 xe5 xe5
31 The Total Marshall
XIIIIIIIIY
9-+-+-+k+0 32 h1 might seem logical but We saw that 12...e8 failed
White still has problems because in Vasiukov-Tolush. 12...a5 is
9+-+-+-+p0 of his bad bishop and now Blacks probably Blacks best try. This
9R+-vl-+r+0 rook may be able to use the e-file. idea to revive the Herman Steiner
9+-+p+-+q0 32...e6 33 g1 h7. Variation was analysed by Tim
9-+-zPpzPl+0 32...h4! 33 fxg6 hxg3 34 hxg3 Harding and George Botterill
9+-zP-+-+-0 xg3 back in 1971. Instead of trying to
9-zP-+-vLQzP0 XIIIIIIIIY play only on the kingside, Black
9-+-+-+k+0 creates complications on a wider
9+-+-tR-mK-0 front by threatening to drive back
xiiiiiiiiy 9+-+-+-+-0
the b3-.
9R+-+-+P+0 13 a3
28 g3!? 9+-+p+-+-0 13 g5 g4 (13...a4 14 c2 e6 15
White could, and perhaps should, 9-+-zP-+q+0 d3) 14 xg2 f5 15 d2 a4 16
have returned the exchange here. 9+-zP-+pvl-0 d1 d5 Botterill & Harding.
However, computers continue to 9-zP-+-wQ-+0 13 a4 bxa4! 14 xa4 is another
prefer White strongly.If 28 xd6! possibility, when 14...d6!? comes
(Else 28...f3) 28... xd6 and now 9+-+-+-mK-0 into consideration but Blacks best
29 f5!? comes into consideration. xiiiiiiiiy may be 14...e8 15 e3 g4 16
For if 29 g3 f3 30 f1 g6 xg2 c8! Markidis-Skembris,
31 f2 is not at all clear, Blacks 35 f1? Greece ch 1998.
strong pressure compensating for This gets mated. White could have 13 xg2 e8 14 g5 (14 f4 a4 15
the two pawns (Nunn). tried for perpetual check here, c2 e6 16 e5!? Blatny) 14...a4 15
Instead 29 h3 xh3 30 xh3 xh3 though it fails to correct play. d1 e6 16 d2 b4! 17 a3 bxc3 18
may be a drawn ending. Thus: 35 a8+ g7 36 a7+ but bxc3 d5 Barbulescu-Sofronie,
28...f3 29 f2 g4!? Black wins with 36...h6! 37 h7+ Romania 1993.
Black bravely continues to play g5 38 f1! (38 c2 f2+! 39 xf2 13...e6! 14 xe6 fxe6 15 xe6
for a win. g2+ 40 e3 xc2 41 xf3 xb2) d5 16 e4N
29...xf4 regains one pawn but 38...f2+ 39 g2 h4+ 40 h2 f4+ After 16 xg2 h4, compared with
reduces the pressure: 30 xg6+ 41 h1 e4+ 42 h2 (42 g2+? the analogous 13 a4 line, Black
xg6 . g3! threatening...f1Q+) 42...f3 stands better as his queenside is
Nevertheless White does not have 43 g2+ g3+ 44 xg3+ xg3+ not ruptured and White does not
a clear advantage yet: 31 b3 h5 45 xg3 f1 and White cannot have such an easy development
32 f1 (32 a1 h4) 32...a6+ achieve a fortress because his King of his a1- and . Then 17 f3
33 c4 h6 and winning is still is too far from the pawns. f6 18 e4 xc6 19 d2 e3!
problematic for White. 35...f2+?! Lukyanchenko, in Shakmaty
30 e3 Inefficient. Black could have mated Riga 17/1977.
Instead White could have tried in four by 35...f4+! 36 h1 h4+ 16...h4 17 f4
30 f5!? (favoured by computers) etc. 17 f3 g5.
but the endgame after 30... f6 36 g2 h4+ 01. 17...f2+!?
(30...xf5?? 31 xd6) 31 ea1 h5 32 Black mates by 37 h1 f3+ 38 XIIIIIIIIY
h3 xh3 33 h2 xh2+ 34 xh2 h2 g3+ 39 h3 f4+ 40 h4 9r+-wq-trk+0
xg3+ 35 xg3 xf5 is not a clear g3+ 41 h5 g5#.
win for White: 36 b4 e2. 9+-zp-+-zpp0
30...h5! Game 23 9-+P+R+-+0
Black wants to exploit the pin on Melnikov 9zpp+n+-+-0
the g-file rather than regain the A.Lukyanchenko 9-+-zPQzP-+0
pawn on f4 which is a possible Central Chess Club Corr Ch 9zP-zP-+-+-0
but by no means certain draw after quarter-final, USSR 1975-76
30...xf4 31 xg6+ hxg6. 1 e4 e5 2 f3 c6 3 b5 a6 4 9-zP-+-vlpzP0
31 xf3 a4 f6 5 00 e7 6 e1 b5 7 9tRNvL-+-mK-0
White decides to eliminate the b3 00 8 c3 d5 9 exd5 e4 10 xiiiiiiiiy
annoying bishop. dxc6 exf3 11 d4 fxg2 12 f3
31 f5! looks as if White should a5!? This sacrifice works because White
draw at least: 31...f6 32 f1 e7 XIIIIIIIIY accepts it but it may not be the best
33 xf6 xf6 and White now has 9r+lwq-trk+0 move.
various possibilities to make Black 18 xf2?
struggle for a half point, viz. 34 b4!?, 9+-zp-vlpzpp0
18 xg2 is obviously better and it
34 e5 or 34 b3. 9-+P+-sn-+0 is not clear how Black continues,
Instead 31 f1? does not prevent 9zpp+-+-+-0 since 18...h4?? does not work
31...h4 because after 32 xh4 h3+ 9-+-zP-+-+0 when it is not check; White would
33 e1 g2 White loses material: 9+LzP-+Q+-0 simply answer 19 xd5.
34 xd6 xf2 35 xf2 g2 gives 18...h4+ 19 g1
Black winning chances. 9PzP-+-zPpzP0
19 xg2 xf4+ 20 xf4 xf4 21
31...exf3 32 f5 9tRNvL-tR-mK-0 e8+ xe8 22 xe8+ f8 23 e6+
After this White loses by force. xiiiiiiiiy h8 24 e2 g5+ 25 h1 c1+ 26
The Total Marshall 36
e7 (or 23...h8 24 xd5 xd5) Herbrechtsmeier. but promising way for Black to treat
24 d2 Blacks problem is the 1 e4 e5 2 f3 c6 3 b5 a6 4 this variation.
on h3 which cannot easily be a4 f6 5 00 e7 6 e1 b5 7 15 d2
moved to a different battle-zone. b3 00 8 c3 d5 9 exd5 xd5 15 f1 h5 16 f3 f5! 17 f2 g6
b) 19...h6 20 a4; 10 xe5 xe5 11 xe5 c6 12 d4 18 xd5 cxd5 19 d2 d3 20 e3
c) 19...c7 20 a4; d6 13 e1 h4 14 g3 h3 15 f5! 21 f4! e4 22 e1 ae8 23 xe4
d) 19...f5?! 20 g5 (20 xd6 xd6 e3 g4 16 d3 ae8 17 d2 fxe4 24 e3 h5.
would be OK for Black.) 20...h5 e6 18 a4 h5 19 axb5 axb5 15...f5! 16 a4!?
21 xh3 xh3 22 f1. 20 f1 Nunn: Saxs important innovation.
e) 19...h5!N and now Tim Harding This game shows that 20 f1 is Black is not threatening anything,
analysis (2002) goes: better, wrote Herbrechtsmeier. so White activates the a1 rook while
e1) 20 g5 f5 21 xf5 xf5 22 Blacks method of drawing now waiting to see Blacks intention.
e4 c7 23 a4 h4. is important for the theory of the 16 f1 h5 17 d1 g6 18 g2
e2) 20...h4 21 g4 (21 g5 f5 see Spassky Variation. ae8! 19 f1 e4! 20 f3 d3 21
note e1) 21...xg4! 22 fxg4 xe4 20...h3 21 d1 f5 22 e2 xe8 xe8 22 d2 xf1 23 xf1
and now: fe8! 23 f1 xg3! 24 hxg3 xg3+ 25 g2
e21) 23 xe4?! xe4 24 axb5 h3 25 23 f3? f4!. e1+! 26 xe1 xe1+=.
f1 xg4+ (25...cxb5!?) 26 h1 23...c5 16...ae8?!
e4+ draws at once, but Black can XIIIIIIIIY a) 16...d3! 17 e1 ae8 18 f3!
also try for more if he dares with xe1+ 19 xe1 h6 (Sax, Hazai;
26...cxb5!? 27 xa6?? e3. 9-+-+r+k+0 INF 45/396). After 20 axb5 axb5
e22) 23 h3 e1+ (23...bxa4!? is also 9+-+-+pzpp0 21 a7 f6 a curious position
possible as an attempt to play for a 9-+-vlr+-+0 arises in which neither player has
win.) 24 xe1 xc2 White is tied 9+pzpn+q+-0 any obviously constructive moves.
up and probably has to force a draw 9-+-zP-+-+0 Black is tied down to the defence
by repetition: 25 f2 d1+ 26 f1 of f7, while White must cover f1
c2 27 f2= Harding. 9+-zP-vL-zPl0 and prepare to meet...e4 or...g4.
19...cxd5 20 xd6 xd6= 9-zP-+QzP-zP0 Therefore the position must be
This gave Black reasonable play 9tR-+LtRNmK-0 judged as unclear, although if
for the pawn commented Nunn. xiiiiiiiiy White can break the deadlock his
21 f4 e7 22 f2 g5 extra pawn might be important
22...h5!? seems playable: 24 c2 Nunn.
a) 23 d2!? f5 leads to a draw after 24 dxc5!? xc5 25 f3 xe3 26 b) 16...f4 17 gxf4 ae8 18 e5!
the heavy pieces are exchanged on xe3 xe3 27 xe3 xe3 28 fxe3 Nunn;
e1 24 e1 xe1+ 25 xe1 xe1 h6 29 a8 xa8 30 xa8+ h7 c) 16...b4 17 e4 g4 18 xd6 h5
26 xe1 b1 Black has nothing to 31 f3 b1 32 g4 g8 and White 19 c4 Nunn.
fear as White cannot manufacture cannot exploit the extra pawn. 17 xe8!
a passed pawn. 24...xc3 17 axb5? f4! 18 gxf4 g4+.
b) 23 a4 h4 24 g4 is unclear; it 24...f6 25 h5. 17...xe8 18 f1!
depends on whether the h3- is 25 bxc3 d5 26 f3 xf1 27 18 xd5 cxd5 19 axb5 axb5 20 f1
strong or weak: 24...bxa4! 25 xa4 xf1 h6! 21 e3 e4 22 g4 xg4 23
f6 26 d2 xg4! 27 fxg4 e4 28 27 xf1?! xe3 28 xb5 b8! xg4 f5 24 e3 f4.
f3 g5. and White must return the gambit 18...h5
23 d2 h5 24 e1 d7 pawn. Since g3 is well defended, White
24...d8!?. 27...xe3 28 e4 may answer ...e4 or ...g4 by f2-
25 g1 f5 28 xe3 xe3 29 xb5 xf3 will f3. If 18...b4 19 c4 f6 20 f3.
The opposite coloured Bishops not serve as a winning attempt 19 xd5 cxd5 20 axb5 axb5
mean that a draw is virtually for White, but after 28 e4 xe1! 21 e3
inevitable. 29 xe1 b3 30 xh7+ (30 d3 The sequel shows how in practice
25...f6!? 26 e1 xe1 (26...c8!?) 27 g6) 30...f8 31 xe8+ xe8 32 the Marshall player may well win
xe1 e6 is a certain draw if the e2+ f8 33 c2 the extra P is even from a position.
queens are exchanged. meaningless. XIIIIIIIIY
26 e1 e4 27 xe4 dxe4 28 9-+-+r+k+0
d1 Game 31
28 f4!? Vitomskis. 9+-+-+pzp-0
Gyula Sax (Hungary) -
28...g4 29 xg5 f6 30 f4 John Nunn (England) 9-+-vl-+-+0
xf3 31 b3+ g7 32 e3 Brussels, 1988 9+p+p+l+p0
h3 33 d5 Notes based on comments by the 9-+-zP-+-+0
players and by Hazai. 9+-zP-sN-zPq0
Game 30 1 e4 e5 2 f3 c6 3 b5 a6 4
Christof Herbrechtsmeier 9-zP-+-zP-zP0
a4 f6 5 00 e7 6 e1 b5 7
(Germany) b3 00 8 c3 d5 9 exd5 xd5 9tR-vLQ+-mK-0
Tnu im (Estonia) 10 xe5 xe5 11 xe5 c6 12 d4 xiiiiiiiiy
Bertl von Massow Memorial corr, d6 13 e2 h4 14 g3 h3
1988 For 14...h5 see Mithrakanth- 21...g6
Comments based on notes by Geller, illustrating an unfashionable If 21...h4 22 f1 hxg3 23 xh3
41 The Total Marshall
has a draw but no more. 24 bxc6!? also comes into but maybe White was afraid of the
29...g8+ consideration: 24...h8 25 xd5 continuation 34...g6 35 e4 (saves
29...g6+? 30 g3 xg3+ 31 xg3 (25 e4!?) 25...xd5 26 e4. the and stops...g5+) 35...e2+
g8 32 a8!. 24...h8 36 h1 g4 (Threatens mate in
30 g3 xf4! 01 24...xd2 25 bxc6 or 24...axb5 25 one!) 37 g2 f4+ 38 f1 f3 39
Because of 31 xf3 xg3, 31 xf4 gxf4. a4 and White is two pawns up
xe1+ or 31 xe6 xg3+. 25 f1 but in a bind.
If 25 d1 h6 but maybe 25 bxc6 34...hxg3 35 hxg3
Game 34 xc3 26 e7 (not 26 bxc3 xd2). 35 fxg3 doesnt give the the h2
Jason F. McKenna (ENG) 25...e8 26 d3 axb5 27 gxf4 square.
Clifford R. Chandler (ENG) xf4 28 g3 h4!? 35...e2+ 36 h2 h5 37 a8+
BPCF Open Final-2 corr, 1989 XIIIIIIIIY h7 38 g8+ g6 39 a6+ g5
Notes by Tim Harding. 9-+-+r+-mk0 40 f4+ g4 41 e6+ f3
1 e4 e5 2 f3 c6 3 b5 a6 4 XIIIIIIIIY
a4 f6 5 00 e7 6 e1 b5 7 9+-+-+-zpp0
9-+p+-+-+0 9-+-+-+-+0
b3 00 8 c3 d5 9 exd5 xd5
10 xe5 xe5 11 xe5 c6 12 9+p+-+-+-0 9+-+-+-zp-0
d4 d6 13 e1 h4 14 g3 h3 9-+-zP-sn-wq0 9R+-+L+-+0
15 e3 g4 16 d3 ae8 17 9+LzPQ+-sNl0 9+-+-+-+r0
d2 e6 18 a4 f5 19 f1 h5 9-+-+-zP-+0
20 axb5!? 9-zP-+-zP-zP0
9tR-+-+-mK-0 9+-zP-+kzPl0
XIIIIIIIIY 9-zP-+n+-mK0
9-+-+-trk+0 xiiiiiiiiy
9+-+-+-+-0
9+-+-+-zpp0 xiiiiiiiiy
This gives Black a dangerous, but
9p+pvlr+-+0 unclear, attack because the white
9+P+n+p+q0 King is bottled up. In an over- Looks dangerous for the white ,
9-+-zP-+l+0 the-board game, I would not put but his defence comes in time. He
9+LzP-vL-zP-0 much money on White surviving reaches a Rook ending with two
9-zP-sN-zP-zP0 but correspondence play (even extra pawns but its a dead draw.
in 1989 without todays computer 42 xh3 xg3 43 g6 f1+
9tR-+-tRQmK-0 aids) it is much easier to calculate 44 g1 xh3 45 xf1 h1+
xiiiiiiiiy accurately in depth if you have 46 g1 h2= 47 xg7 xb2
the vision and motivation. Instead This threatens mate, so wins the
Shamkovich & Schiller suggested 28...xd3 would be the safe move f-pawn.
this as an alternative to the normal as 29 xh5 g6 30 g3 xb2 should 48 e1 xf4 49 d1 e5 50
20 f4. It is not so easy to refute the draw. d7 h2 . A fascinating
idea. 29 f3 h5 30 xc6 e7 31 game with several unclear points.
20...f4 21 xf4 xf4 xb5?!
Nunns move. If 21...xf4 22 xe6 I think this move indicates that Game 35
xe6 23 bxa6. either White expected a forced Horst Rittner (Germany)
22 xe6 xe6 23 e1!? draw or did not see what was Henk Sarink (Netherlands)
23 gxf4 axb5 (regaining the pawn coming? Better 31 c2 (idea Armando Silli Memorial corr, 1990
on f4 with good play for the other e4 to force off queens) 31...f8 1 e4 e5 2 f3 c6 3 b5 a6 4
pawn - Nunn, 1989) 24 e1!? now (31...e1+ 32 f1 e7 (32...e2 a4 f6 5 00 e7 6 e1 b5 7
seems the critical line as it was a 33 e3 or 32...xa1?? 33 xe8#) b3 00 8 c3 d5 9 exd5 xd5
bit better for White in Mousessian- 33 e3) 32 xb5 and Black has 10 xe5 xe5 11 xe5 c6 12 d4
T.Andresen. Black went gradually nothing clear. d6 13 e1 h4 14 g3 h3 15
downhill and it is hard to pinpoint 31...h4!? e3 g4 16 d3 ae8 17 d2
anywhere that he missed a clear A bold, if risky, winning try. Black e6 18 a4 h5
draw. could have played 31...e1+!= This game is included for the
23...h3 32 f1 (32 xe1 xe1+ 33 f1 illumination of those readers who
Not 23...h6 24 gxf4. (33 f1 e2+ 34 h1 xf1+ may believe the Spassky Variation
Instead 23...e8!? 24 bxc6 (24 or 34 xe2 xf1#) 32...e2+ 33 gives Black at best a draw.
gxf4?? h3) 24...h8! is very h1 g3+ 34 g1 (34 hxg3?? 19 axb5 axb5 20 f1 fe8
complicated e.g. 25 e4 (25 d1 e4+ and mates; 34 fxg3?? is the 20...f5 is possibly even better.
f7 or 25 gxf4?? xf4 26 e4 same) 34...e2+ with a draw by 21 d1 xd1 22 xd1 f5
h3+ 27 g2 g5+ 28 f1 g1+ repetition. 23 d2
29 e2 xf2+) 25...c7 when 32 e5 xe5 33 dxe5 xe5 23 a6 is not any better: 23...h5 24
Black retains his extra piece but 33...hxg3 34 hxg3. xc6 h4 25 d2 as Black can play
White has many pawns in return. 34 c4!? either 25...h3!? (Metz-im) or first
It could continue 26 c5 (26 xa6 White gets three pawns for a piece exchange rooks on e1, with roughly
h3=) 26...g4 27 xd5 xe1+ 28 but hardly has winning chances. equal chances in either case.
xe1 h6 and the position remains 34 a8+ h7 35 c2+ is not 23...xe1 24 xe1
very obscure. clearly to Whites advantage. White thought that exchanges
24 e4! Instead 34 c2 threatens mate, would ease his task but Blacks B
43 The Total Marshall
XIIIIIIIIY
17 xb7 xb7 18 xe8+ xe8 19 White has an extra pawn, but it 9-+-+-tr-mk0
xd5 cxb2 20 b1 b5 was soon is blockaded by a rook that has
drawn in S.L.Jones-Harding, Email a fairly active post. Whites other 9+-+-+-zpp0
olympiad 2000. The two-time US pawns are not so healthy. 9p+p+R+-+0
CC Champion could find nothing 28...f8 29 f2 e7 30 f4 g5 9+-+-+p+q0
against my plan. More active play. 9R+NzP-snl+0
b) 14 xe8+ xe8 15 a4 b4! (The 31 f3 gxf4 32 xf4 e6 33 9+LzP-+-zP-0
key idea) 16 d2 (16 c4 can be e4 h5 34 c2 h4+ 35 d3
met by 16...f4 and if xf4 e4 f5 36 f2 e5 37 c2 d6 38 9-zP-+-+-zP0
threatening mate on g2) 16...f4 17 g2 h3 39 f2 9+-+-+QmK-0
f3 e6 with good compensation for 39 g6+ c5 40 xa6 f4 41 e6 xiiiiiiiiy
Black. fxe3 42 xe3 xh2 is a book
14 dxc5 e8 15 a3 draw. 24 gxf4? h3 25 xe6 g4+ 01
a) 15 xe8+ xe8 16 xd5 xd5 39...e5 40 c5 e6 41 c2 d7 Qaw-Macarena, Internet Chess
17 e3 e4 18 f1 c2 19 c1 42 d4 Club 1997.
g6 20 f1=. White has managed to improve 24...h3+!!N
b) 15 d2 f4 16 f3 xg2! 17 his king position so care is still Nunn only analysed 24...xe6 25
xg2 xe1 18 xe1 d7 19 h3 required. e5!. The arrival of a horse on
xf3+ 20 xf3 xh3+ 21 e2 42...c6 43 e2 the e5 square after...f5 has been
h5+! 22 f1 h1+=. 43 f2 h4+ 44 e5 e4+ 45 xf5 played nearly always spells a
15...c7?! xe3 is similar to the game. terminal prognosis for Black in
Black is now really in trouble. 43...h5 44 c2 h4+ 45 e5 the Marshall. Black has regained
15...d7 is only a little better.. e4+ 46 xf5 xe3 47 g5 his material but suffers from bad
16 xe8+! xe8 17 xd5 d8 e5+ 48 h4 a5 49 h3 d5 pawn structure. 25...f4 (Or 25...e2
18 f4 xf4 . Black need only shuffle his 26 g4 Kristensen-Weissleder) 26
XIIIIIIIIY rook. xe6 xe6 27 xa6 g8 28 xc6!
9-+-tr-+k+0 (Not 28 f3? f5 29 a1 d5
Game 40 because on the other hand, a black
9+l+-+pzpp0 Viktoras Milvydas (Lithuania) supported on d5 usually spells
9p+-+-vl-+0 Sergei K. Muravyev (Ukraine) Curtains for White...) 28...h3 29
9+pzPL+-+-0 5th European Corr Team Ch a5! h6 (29...g4 30 e5) 30
9-+-+-wq-+0 prelims, 1994 f3+- and Blacks attack has run
9sN-zP-+-+-0 1 e4 e5 2 f3 c6 3 b5 a6 4 out of steam Nunn.
a4 f6 5 00 e7 6 e1 b5 7 25 g2 g5! 26 f2! f3+ 27
9PzP-+-zPPzP0 b3 00 8 c3 d5 9 exd5 xd5 f1 f4
9tR-+Q+-mK-0 10 xe5 xe5 11 xe5 c6 12 d4 27...xe6!? 28 xa6 f4 29 e1 e8
xiiiiiiiiy d6 13 e1 h4 14 g3 h3 15 30 d2 fxg3 but I am not sure
e3 g4 16 d3 ae8 17 d2 if Black has more than a draw
19 f3? e6 18 a4 f5 19 f1 h5 20 f4 Elburg.
After 19 xb7! xd1+ 20 xd1+- bxa4 21 xa4 h8 22 c4 28 g4
White would have had rook, knight 22 xd5 cxd5 23 xa6 is also 28 e1 but looks as if
and two pawns for queen with critical: Black should have something
good winning chances. Now Black a) After 23...fe8, Nunn treats this somewhere: 28...xe6 (28...fxg3!?
reduced the deficit and managed position as a transposition to the 29 xg3 xe6) 29 xa6 e8 30
to draw. line 21...fe8 22 xa6 h8 23 d2 g5 31 d6 fxg3 32 hxg3 h1
19...xf3 20 xf3 xf3 21 xd5 cxd5 but I think it properly (32...h6) 33 a5 c5 34 dxc5 e2+?
gxf3 b4! 22 c2 bxc3 23 bxc3 belongs here as a critical line for 35 xe2 xe2 36 xe2 (10, 67)
c8 21...h8. The reason is that in the Computer test game Nimzo-Rebel,
Black wants to eliminate the more other line, Black has the strong 1999.
dangerous c5-pawn rather than let move 22...xe3 so there is no 28...h3+ 29 e1 xe6 30 e5
White get his rook behind it. reason for him to move the king. g5 31 xa6!! xg4 32 c4!!
24 b1 h6 25 c4 xc5 26 e3 b) 23...e8 24 f2! (24 f2 b5 25 With an amazing drawing idea.
d4 27 c1 xe3 28 fxe3 a2 fe8 gives Black reasonable White loses after:
XIIIIIIIIY play.) and not now 24...e2? 25 a) 32 xc6?? d3 33 a1 f3+ 34
xd6+- Nunn. xf3 xf3 35 d2 e2+ 36 c1
9-+-+-+k+0 22...xf4!? e1+ 37 c2 f5#.
9+-+-+pzp-0 Ingenious but maybe inadequate, b) 32 xc6?? e4;
9p+-+-+-zp0 this move was analysed by GM John c) 32 xg4?? xg4 33 h3 e8+ 34
9+-tr-+-+-0 Nunn in 1989. The improvement d2 g3 35 xg3 fxg3+.
9-+P+-+-+0 at move 24 seems to mean Black 32...e4
draws and could easily win if White Black can try to win but it may be
9+-+-zPP+-0 goes wrong. 22...xe3 23 xe3 risky. Moves to be considered are
9P+-+-+-zP0 was prior theory. 32...g6 (to stop the perpetual check
9+-tR-+-mK-0 23 xf4 but going into an ending after 33
xiiiiiiiiy 23 gxf4? g6 Nunn. xg4 xg4 34 e2) and 32...f3
23...xf4 24 xe6 33 a7! (but not here 33 d3
The Total Marshall 46
e6 34 xc6 g2 nor 33 xc6?? set-up with the rooks doubled on (Analysis by Cuban players Jaime
e4+ nor 33 xg4 xg4+). the e-file and not obstructing the Chavez & Perez Perez).
33 f3!! h4+ bishops. The onus is on White to 25 aa1 e4 26 d2 hxg3 27
A.Bandza, in Informator, gave other find something to do. hxg3 f5
variations. If 33...xf3 34 f7+ 19 a4 White would face a lot of technical
g8 35 h6+ (35 g5+ or other Whites 18th and 19th were a difficulties to win after the double
discoveries with same result: a plan recommended by Nikitin rook exchange if Black did not
draw.) or if 33...xf3 34 f7+ again in Shakhmatny Bulletin 2/1976 weaken his kingside in this way.
forcing repetition because the black page 37. White tries to transpose Blatny and Ftacnik recommend
rook cannot leave the back rank. to Unzicker-Rossolimo. For 19 27...8e6 f6 with counterplay.
34 g3 g2? h5 see 18 g2. 28 g2!
It will be a repetition by 34...fxg3 19...bxa4 If 28 e3? f4! or 28 h1 xh1+ 29
35 f7+ g8 36 h6+ because the The critical move. 19...b4 20 c4 xh1 xe1 30 xe1 xe1 31 xe1
threats balance. dxc4 21 xc4 b7 (21...b8 22 a5 h1.
d2! xe1+ 23 xe1 xe1+ 24 28...h5 29 f3!
Game 41 xe1 e6 25 e3 Unzicker- 29 xe4? dxe4!? (29...xe4) 30 e3
Viswanathan Anand (India) - Rossolimo, Cheltenham 1952) 22 e2 31 d2 f4! 32 gxf4 xf4 33
Gata Kamsky (USA) d5 (Geller) 22...c7 (Castellanos xf4 e3.
3rd Candidates match game, Salinas-Lopez Gomez, Cuba corr 29...xe1 30 xe1 xe1 31
Sanghi Nagar, India 1994 1996) 23 ed1! Jaime Chavez & xe1 e8
1 e4 e5 2 f3 c6 3 b5 a6 4 Perez Perez. Better is 31...f4 but 32 g4 g6 33
a4 f6 5 00 e7 6 e1 b5 7 20 xa4 h5 e2 (Blatny).
b3 00 8 c3 d5 9 exd5 xd5 20...h8 21 ea1 Geller-Jansa, 32 d2 a5 33 e3 g6?
10 xe5 xe5 11 xe5 c6 12 Amsterdam 1974. 33...e6 34 h3 g6 Ftacnik.
d4 d6 13 e1 h4 14 g3 h3 21 a5 b7 34 f2 a4 35 g2 a3 36 bxa3
15 e3 e8 21...h4? is not good, as shown in xa3
15...a7!? is a similar approach, analysis by Blatny and Ftacnik Black has made progress in
and perhaps a psychologically e.g. 22 xd5 hxg3 (22...b7 23 establishing a queenside blockade
more shocking move for White if f5 xf5 24 xf5 hxg3 25 hxg3 using his bishop pair, but his
he has not met it before. Tim quite xg3 26 fxg3 xe3 27 xe3 xe3 kingside is vulnerable.
likes this variation for Black against 28 f2+-) 23 hxg3 b7 24 h5 37 f4
opponents who may be booked- (24 f5 h8!?; 24 h5 d7 25 Planning e5, f4 g8.
up. See our survey on the move 15 g5 f6 26 g6 c6) 24...xg3+ 37...c6 38 e5 f8 39 f4
alternatives for Black. (24...c8 25 d5) 25 fxg3 xf3 26 g5 40 g2! e6 41 e3 f7 42
16 xd5 xf3 xe3 27 xe3 xe3 28 c2 d7
If 16 a4? xe3 while 16 f3 will f2 with a winning endgame for If 42...g6 43 g4!+-.
transpose after 16...a7 (16...g4 White. 43 h2
was suggested by Geller but is less 22 aa1 c8!N Blatny suggests 43 b3 c6 44
reliable.) 17 d2 ae7 18 xd5 (18 22...h4 23 h5 c8 24 f3 hxg3 b1 d7 45 b7+-. White is
f1? f4!) 18...cxd5 to the game. 25 xh3 xh3 26 hxg3 xg3 manoeuvring to win a second
16...cxd5 17 f3 and now 27 fxg3 (Tseshkovsky- pawn after which the end is just a
Nunn said it was important for I.Ivanov, Minsk 1976) and 27 xa6 matter of time.
White to counter-attack d5. 17 (Blatny) are both somewhat better 43...g6 44 a2 e6 45 xd5
d3?! a7 18 d2 ae7 19 a4 f5 for White. xd5 46 xd5 c6 47 c4
20 f4 g5! (Euwe). 23 a5! b7 24 f1! e6
17...a7 18 d2 After the repetition, White tries a 47...xd5 48 cxd5 is also a lost
Not 18 xd5?? b7+. new tack. endgame for Black.
18 g2? h5 19 d2 ae7 20 XIIIIIIIIY 48 c7+ d7 49 f2 a3 50
a4 b4 21 c4 dxc4 22 xc4 b7 9-+-+r+k+0 e2 b2 51 b5 g4 52 fxg4
Tseshkovsky-G.Kuzmin, USSR ch fxg4 53 d3 a1 54 c2 e4+
1975. 9+l+-trpzp-0 55 b3 d3 56 c3
18...ae7 9p+-vl-+-+0 56 a3 e2! when White must
XIIIIIIIIY 9tR-+p+-+p0 avoid the pin 57 c2? d1.
9-+l+r+k+0 9-+-zP-+-+0 56...e6 57 d5 f5 58 b4
9+-zP-vLQzPq0 e2 59 c5 d1+ 60 c4 e6
9+-+-trpzpp0 1-0. White is ready to advance his
9p+-vl-+-+0 9-zP-+-zP-zP0 pawns by 61 c6 f3 62 f4+-.
9+p+p+-+-0 9+-+-tRNmK-0
9-+-zP-+-+0 xiiiiiiiiy Game 42
9+-zP-vLQzPq0 Vasily Ivanchuk (Ukraine) -
24...h4?! Nigel Short (England)
9PzP-sN-zP-zP0 Tal Memorial, Riga 1995
24...e6!? (Blatny, CBM 42) gives
9tR-+-tR-mK-0 White a slight edge. Notes by Martin Bennedik
xiiiiiiiiy 24...f5 is probably best, e.g. 25 1 e4 e5 2 f3 c6 3 b5 a6 4
aa1 f4! 26 d2 f8! 27 xe7 fxg3 a4 f6 5 00 e7 6 e1 b5 7
Black has achieved his planned 28 e3! xe7 29 xg3 d7 b3 00 8 c3 d5 9 exd5 xd5
47 The Total Marshall
10 xe5 xe5 11 xe5 c6 12 practical experience, to see if this very interesting moves:
d4 d6 13 e1 h4 14 g3 h3 is enough. c1) 30 g3 f3 (30...h5! 31 f8
15 e3 g4 16 d3 ae8 17 25...f3 xf8 32 xf8 b7=) 31 e2 h5 32
d2 e6 18 a4 bxa4 19 xa4 XIIIIIIIIY ce8 h4 33 8e3 g4 34 g2 Enst
f5 20 f1 h5 21 xa6 f4 22 9-+-+-trk+0 (34 h1 h3!);
xf4!N c2) 30 e2 Bennedik;
22 xc6? Lilienthal-Hallier; 22 9+-+-+-zpp0 c3) 30 e3 b7 (30...g4+?! 31 g3
gxf4? g6. 9-+R+R+-+0 h5 32 h3 33 c5) 31 ce8 (31
22...h3 23 xe6! 9+-+n+-+-0 e6+ f7 32 ce8 xb2 33 8e7+
23 xc6 would probably transpose 9-+-zP-vl-+0 drawing, not 31...g5? 32 c5+)
to the main line after 23...xf1 24 9+LzP-+qzP-0 31...xb2 32 8e6+ (32 f3!?)
xe6 xf4 25 xf1. 32...f7 33 e7+ g6 34 7e6+
23 xd5? xd5 (Not 23...cxd5 9-zP-+-zP-zP0 Ernst.
24 xd6) 24 xh3 xe1+ 25 9+-+-+NmK-0 c4) 30 f8 I proposed this move in
f1 xf4 (Dolmatov) 26 gxf4 xiiiiiiiiy my article in Chess Mail 5/1999.
(Bennedik). The whole line has never been
23...xf1 24 xf1 a) If 25...b8? 26 f4 (clearer than tried in practice, however. Now
24 xc6 again should transpose 26 e3 f7 27 f6 xf6 28 xf7+ 30...xf8 31 xf8 b5 32 c8
to the main line after 24...xf4 25 xf7) 26...h8 27 c5+-. xb2 33 d5 e2 34 e3.
xf1. b) 25...h8? seems to be too slow: 26...xd5 27 gxf4
24...xf4 26 xd5 xd5 27 gxf4 f3 28 g3 XIIIIIIIIY
XIIIIIIIIY h5 29 c5 xf4 30 xh5+ g8 31 9-+-+-trk+0
9-+-+-trk+0 e2+-; 9+-+-+-zpp0
9+-+-+-zpp0 c) 25...xg3? 26 xg3 f3 27 e2
h8 28 xd5 xd5 29 c5+-. 9-+R+R+-+0
9R+p+R+-+0 d) Not 25...b8? 26 b6! or 9+-+q+-+-0
9+-+n+-+q0 25...h6?? 26 e5+- (Ernst). 9-+-zP-zP-+0
9-+-zP-vl-+0 26 xd5 9+-zP-+-+-0
9+LzP-+-zP-0 Better is 26 gxf4 xf4 27 e8+ f7 9-zP-+-zP-zP0
9-zP-+-zP-zP0 28 xd5+ xd5. (Ernst observed
that in the game Black could have 9+-+-+NmK-0
9+-+-+NmK-0 forced this position with 27...xf4 xiiiiiiiiy
xiiiiiiiiy instead of 27...f3.) 29 cc8
with a critical position of the line 27...f3
25 axc6 invented by Ivanchuk (see analysis 27...xf4 28 e8+ f7 - 26.gxf4.
25 exc6!? is an interesting, yet diagram). 28 d5
untested alternative: 28 g3 is a try to avoid the draw,
a) 25...xg3 26 hxg3 (Even after XIIIIIIIIY but it looks rather risky. Compare
26 xg3 f3 27 xd5+ xd5 28 9-+R+R+-+0 with the note to 25 exc6, e.g.:
e6 f3 29 e2 h5 Fritz stubbornly 28...xf4 (28...xf4 29 e2 Ernst)
defends with 30 h4.) 26...f3 27 9+-+-+kzpp0 29 c8+ f7 30 e2 h5 31 ce8
xd5+ xd5 28 f4. As long as 9-+-+-+-+0 (31 h4 xh4 32 ce8 f4 33 8e7+
no way to undermine Whites 9+-+q+-+-0 g8 34 7e3 g4 35 h2 h4 36
kingside can be demonstrated, 9-+-zP-tr-+0 e4 f3) 31...h4 32 8e7+ g8
the conclusion must be that this 9+-zP-+-+-0 33 7e3 g4 34 b4 hxg3 35 hxg3
position is better for White. f3. In this line, Ernst thought 32
b) 25...f3? 26 c5 f5 27 xd5 9-zP-+-zP-zP0 8e3 was necessary, but liked the
xd5 28 a5 Ernst. 9+-+-+NmK-0 Black attack after 32...g4 33 f3
c) 25...h8 26 xd5 xd5 27 gxf4 xiiiiiiiiy g6 ( g3) 34 e8 d3.
f3 28 e6 and now: 28...h5?
c1) 28...h5 29 e3 xf4 (29...g4+ In contrast to the game continuation Nigel Short did not want to play a
30 g3 xf4 31 g2 h4 32 h3) 30 where Black could have played draw but probably overstretched his
f3. 28...xf4 (see below), White can position and lost in the end. Better
c2) 28...g5 29 f5 (29 f6 xf6 30 answer 29...f3 with 30 f8+ and is 28...xf4!= Fernandez-Harding
xf6 gxf4 or 29 e7 gxf4 30 h6 31 xf4, defending against the ended here with a draw. Indeed
g4+ 31 g3 fxg3) 29...xf5 30 threat...xf2. For example: White has to give a perpetual check
e8+ g7 31 a7+ f6 32 f8+ a) 29...f3 30 f8+ e7 31 xf4 now because of ...xf2+.
e6 33 xf5 xf5. I think this xf4 32 e3 g5+ 33 h1 b5 29 c4 h4
position is Blacks best chance 34 c5 xb2 35 g2 White seems 29...g4+ maybe was a better try.
against 25 exc6. Whites one to be better, but the position is still 30 g6 d3 31 gc6
rook coordinates far less well very complicated. 31 cc6? xf4.
with the knight than Whites two b) 29...g4+ 30 g3 h5 31 h3 g5 31...xd5
rooks in the other lines. Also, 32 f8+ g6 33 c5 b3 34 xg5+ 31...f3 32 e3!.
Black now can push his h-pawn xg5 35 f5+ g6 36 xh5 xb2 32 c8 h3 33 e3 d2 34
and still create counterplay against 37 c5. f1?
Whites king. Still, it would require c) 29...g6 when there are several This nearly spoiled the win. 34
The Total Marshall 48
xf8+ xf8 35 f1 (Dolmatov) is which are different from most of the - Timmerman-Tarnowiecki,
correct. 11...c6 Marshall lines. NBC Millennium Email 2000.
34...xb2 15...g5 24 f1 e6 25 e2 d5
34...c1+!? 35 e2 xb2+ would Black prevents Whites h4 idea I got a surprise.
have drawn in view of 36 f3? by direct means, justified by the 26 e3!N
b7+ 37 8c6 f6 38 d5 xc6+ variation 16 xg5? f5 attacking Instead of 26 f1 f4
(Dolmatov). two loose pieces. As this obviously Shamkovich.
35 xf8+ xf8 36 c8+ f7 37 weakens Blacks kingside and does White has a clear plan. Maybe Black
h8 xc3 38 xh3+- not lead to a clear resolution in can play better somewhere, but the
XIIIIIIIIY Blacks favour, other moves are main thing here is that unlike other
9-+-+-+-+0 sometimes tried. However, 15...g5 lines in Marshall, White has the
is probably best. For a less reliable initiative while Black has material,
9+-+-+kzp-0 approach, see Leko-Adams. so it is hard psychologically to
9-+-+-+-+0 16 f3 f5 17 xd5 cxd5 18 adopt to the changed scenario.
9+-+-+-+-0 e3 e4 19 xe4 dxe4 20 f6! 26...ac8 27 f4 xf4+ 28
9-+-+-zP-+0 g4 xf4 b4 29 c1 b8 30 c2
9+-wq-sN-+R0 20...f4!? is an idea that has rarely bxc3 31 bxc3 a5 32 e3 a4 33
been tried: 21 xf4 gxf4 22 xf4 c4+ d6 34 d5 a3 35 c3 h5 36
9-+-+-zP-zP0 f5 23 d2 g7 24 f1 h6 draw d4 b2 37 c5+ e7 38 c4
9+-+-+K+-0 (Stean-Radulovic, Schilde 1970). xf2 39 xa3 xh2 40 c6 c2
xiiiiiiiiy 21 xg5+ 41 a7+ f6 42 c7 c8 43 a6+
If 21 xg5 ae8 threatening ...e6. e7 44 c6 xc4+ 45 xc4
38...d3+ 39 e1 e4 In Timman-Ivanchuk, Linares 1991, d7 46 a4 10
39...g8!? or 39...g6!? was a better a draw soon followed 21 d2!? but
defence. this was a last round game and may Game 44
40 e2 g8 41 f5 f7 42 g3 not prove much. David A. Kilgour (Scotland)
h1 43 h3 e4 44 g4 h1 45 21...xg5 22 xg5 f5 Janis Vitomskis (Latvia)
h4 h2 46 f1 e5+ 47 f3! This endgame was thought fine for CC Olympiad XII Final, board 1,
d5+ 48 e4 d1+ 49 g2 Black until some postal games in 1998-2000
d5 50 g3 c6 the 1980s. It should still be OK for Notes by Vitomskis.
50...g6!? was the last chance. him, with care. 1 e4 e5 2 f3 c6 3 b5 a6 4
51 h3 c2 52 f3 d1 53 g4 23 d2 a4 f6 5 00 e7 6 e1 b5 7
g1 54 e6 d4+ 55 e4 d7 XIIIIIIIIY b3 00 8 c3 d5 9 exd5 xd5
56 g5+ g8 57 h5 d8 58 9r+-+-trk+0 10 xe5 xe5 11 xe5 c6 12
g6 d7 59 h5 b5 60 e4 e1
9+-+-+-+p0 In this case it is immaterial whether
10
If 60...a4 61 d6+-. 9p+-vl-+-+0 White plays 12 d3, or 12 e1 and
9+p+-+pvL-0 13 d3.
Game 43 9-+-zPp+-+0 12...d6 13 d3
Gert Jan Timmerman 9+-zP-+-zP-0 XIIIIIIIIY
(Netherlands) - 9PzP-sN-zP-zP0 9r+lwq-trk+0
Janis Vitomskis (Latvia) 9+-+-+pzpp0
15th CC World Ch Final, 1996 9tR-+-+-mK-0
Notes by Vitomskis and Harding xiiiiiiiiy 9p+pvl-+-+0
1 e4 e5 2 f3 c6 3 b5 a6 4 9+p+n+-+-0
a4 f6 5 00 e7 6 e1 b5 7 23...f7 9-+-+-+-+0
b3 00 8 c3 d5 9 exd5 xd5 Nunn suggested 23...g7. 9+LzPP+-+-0
10 xe5 xe5 11 xe5 c6 12 If 23...ae8 24 a4!. This move was 9PzP-+-zPPzP0
d4 d6 13 e1 h4 14 g3 h3 recommended for White by Nunn
15 e4 (1989) on the basis of the postal 9tRNvLQtR-mK-0
XIIIIIIIIY games Trautmann-Nikolic and xiiiiiiiiy
9r+l+-trk+0 van der Weijer-Jackson. However
Black seems to get satisfactory play Black has tried several plans against
9+-+-+pzpp0 with 24...f4! e.g.: this popular system. See the surveys
9p+pvl-+-+0 a) 25 e1 e3 26 fxe3 fxg3 27 hxg3 by Tim Harding and Janis Vitomskis
9+p+n+-+-0 xg3 28 f1 bxa4 29 e4 xf1+ for the detailed analyses.
9-+-zPR+-+0 30 xf1 b8 31 c4 xb2 32 d5 13...h4
9+LzP-+-zPq0 b3 33 d6 xd6 01 M.Jonsson- The old line with 13...f5 is not
R.Berzinsh, Hallsberg junior looking so reliable these days but
9PzP-+-zP-zP0 tournament 1993. maybe it will see a revival.
9tRNvLQ+-mK-0 b) 25 axb5 axb5 26 gxf4 xf4 27 13...f5 14 f3 e8 15 xe8+ xe8
xiiiiiiiiy xf4 xf4 28 e1 f7 29 e3 f6 16 d2 e1+ 17 f1 g6 18 xd5
30 f1 f5 31 e2 h5 32 g3 g4 is usually recommended (After 18
This has been a controversial 33 f1 xg3 34 hxg3 a8 35 e3+ g3! may we draw your attention
variation for 20 years. It can lead to g5 36 d2 a2 37 c2 a6 38 to the critical possibility 18...f6!?
positions, difficult for both players, d2 a2 39 c2 a6 40 d2 a2 as played in the game Colucci-
49 The Total Marshall
Riegsecker. Unfortunately, White Black who has the inferior minor xd5+
can probably maintain an edge, piece. (Almasi-Tseshkovsky, 20 f1!?.
because 18...e8 does not look Niksic 1997). 20...cxd5
viable after 19 d1!.) 18...cxd5 19 b) 22...c6 23 f3 ad8 24 d4 XIIIIIIIIY
xd5 but we think Black draws (24 e4 also gives chances of 9rvll+-trk+0
by 19...d8 20 g5 xa1 21 xd8 an edge to White; Black has to
xh2+ 22 xh2 xf1 23 a8 h6 24 defend precisely with no winning 9+-+-+-zpp0
d4 e2 as White has no dangerous chances.) 24...cxd4 25 cxd4 h6 26 9p+-+-+q+0
discovered check. e4 a8 27 ad1 (27 ac1!? is 9+p+p+p+-0
14 g3 h3 15 e4 another possibility offering White 9-+-+-+-+0
XIIIIIIIIY an edge.) 27...b6 28 c5 f6 29 9+-zPP+QzP-0
9r+l+-trk+0 f5 d6 30 e7 d5 31 e5 f6 32
d3 Leko-Slobodjan, Groningen 9PzP-sN-+-zP0
9+-+-+pzpp0 1997. 9tR-vL-tR-mK-0
9p+pvl-+-+0 16 e1 g6 17 d2 f5 xiiiiiiiiy
9+p+n+-+-0 XIIIIIIIIY
9-+-+R+-+0 9r+l+-trk+0 21 b3!
9+LzPP+-zPq0 9+-+-+-zpp0 Kilgour uses commonly used tactics
9PzP-+-zP-zP0 against gambits he gives back
9p+pvl-+q+0 the pawn and starts positional
9tRNvLQ+-mK-0 9+p+n+p+-0 play against Blacks weakness:
xiiiiiiiiy 9-+-+-+-+0 his limited space for a pair of
9+LzPP+-zP-0 bishops.
This is an important position in 9PzP-sN-zP-zP0 21 f1 b7 22 e7 c6 23 e3
recent theory. (Popovic - Pavlovic, Yugoslavia
White prevents ...g4 and threatens 9tR-vLQtR-mK-0 1993) 23...f6 24 g5 d6 25 xg6
h4 in some lines to repel the black xiiiiiiiiy xg6 (Pavlovic) 26 e2!? f4.
Queen. 21 xd5+ h8 22 f3 xg3 23
Compared with the position after 18 f4 hxg3 xg3+ 24 f1 f4.
Whites 15th move in Game 43, 18 c4 is not so dangerous: 18...f4 21...b7
the only difference is the position 19 e4 (19 cxd5 fxg3 20 dxc6+ 21...f7 may be inferior: 22 d4
of the white d-pawn, but this is a h8 21 fxg3 xg3!) 19...fxg3 20 (Tnu im has recently tried the
very significant difference. As the fxg3 g4 21 c2 bxc4 22 dxc4 (22 immediate 22 f4 here.) 22...a7
rook is defended by a pawn, Black xc4!? c7 23 c2 h8 24 xd5 23 f4 d7 24 e5 b4 25 ae1 (25
cannot play 15...g5 (as he does in b6+!?) 22...ae8 23 cxd5 f3 24 xd5 xd5 26 xd5 b5 27 d1
the analogous position with the dxc6+ h8 (see analysis diagram) bxc3 28 bxc3 ac8) 25...ae8 26
white pawn on d4) because White XIIIIIIIIY f1 bxc3 27 bxc3 (Leko-Adams,
would simply reply 16 xg5 and 9-+-+rtr-mk0 Linares 1999).
16...f5 is not a fork. 22 f4
Black has tried a variety of plans, 9+-+-+-zpp0 22 e7 a7+ 23 d4 (or 23 e3 d4
e.g. 15...d7 with...b7 (or b7 9p+Pvl-+q+0 24 xb7 dxe3 25 d4 (25 g2 f4
first), 15...d7 (not so good), 9+-+-+-+-0 Am. Rodriguez) 25...f4) 23...f7
15...f6, and the manoeuvre f5- 9-+-+N+-+0 24 e2 b6 25 f4 ff8;
g6 as in this game, which is a fairly 9+L+-+lzP-0 22 f2.
solid line. 22...a7+ 23 d4 ae8 24 xe8
15...f5 9PzPQ+-+-zP0 24 e5 e7=.
For the playable variation with 9tR-vL-tR-mK-0 24 f2 e4 25 d2 h6?!
15...f6 see the computer versus xiiiiiiiiy (25...ee8!?) 26 xe4 dxe4 27 h4
human game, Hiarcs v Bergmanis, g4 28 e2 (28 d6? f4 29 xf8
below. Now 25 d5 (if 25 c7 xe4 26 e3!+ Am.Rodriguez) 28...h3 29
15...d7 16 d2 b7 has been c8 xc8 27 xe4 c5+) f1+- (Am. Rodriguez-Perez, Cuba
played a lot, but 17 e1 c5 18 e4 25...xg3 26 hxg3 xe4 27 f4 ch 1998).
e7 19 a4 b4 20 g5 is the critical (Andrijevic-Pavlovic, Yugoslavia 24...xe8 25 f1 f7!? 26 g2
line, good for White: 20...xg5 21 1988) 27...xe1+ 28 xe1 xc2 d7 27 a3 e4 28 d2
xg5 bxc3 22 bxc3 and now: 29 xf3 followed by c1 wins 28 c1!? e7 29 d3 e2+ 30 f2
a) 22...h6 23 e4 c6 (It looks (Nunn). xf2+ 31 xf2 (Gipslis).
as if Black is getting counterplay Let me take the liberty of expressing 28...e8 29 d3 f7 30 f3
on the long diagonal, but White a different view: 29...xb2!? 30 c7 30 e5 c8=.
can neutralise this with his own h5 31 e2 (31 xh5 d4+ 32 g2 30...h5 31 e5 b6 32 f2
threats.) 24 h5 ad8 25 f5 xc3 d5+ 33 f3 xa2+ (33...f5 34
26 xc5 xd3 (26...xe4 27 xc6 d1) 34 e2 f7) 31...c3 32
xc6 28 dxe4 d4 29 e5 b8 30 d2 (32 xh5 c5+ 33 h1 xf4 Game 45
e3) 27 c4 xc5 28 xc5 d4 34 gxf4 xc7) 32...xf4 33 d8+ Peter Leko (Hungary) -
29 f1! c6 30 ec1! xa4 31 e6 h7 34 c8 xc8 35 xc8 xf3 Michael Adams (England)
fxe6 32 xc6 f6 33 xa6!. (Vitomskis). Dortmund 1999
This is an awkward ending for 18...xf4 19 f3!? b8 20 1 e4 e5 2 f3 c6 3 b5 a6
The Total Marshall 50
through threats to his King. Anyway practice the truth may be somewhat 0.5/2 in my database, whereas this
this seems to ensure a safe draw different. If White is unwilling to move never lost and often won.
and White must be a bit careful tread the well-worn path to an 24 d5
now. Instead 36...g6 gives Black early draw, he must take some For alternatives, see the notes to
no winning chances as the white risks and can very soon find himself the Estrin game.
King breaks out. Then Black will turning over his king... 24...h6 25 f4
struggle to stop all Whites pawns, 19 axb5 XIIIIIIIIY
though it should be possible. Nunn wrote that there is no reason 9-+-+r+k+0
37 g4 for White to delay this capture, but
If 37 f1 g6! while 37 f2! d1+! there is an alternative: 19 f1 h3 9+-+-+-zpp0
will draw by repetition: 38 g2 See Part 1 of the Vitomskis survey 9R+pvl-+-tr0
f3+ 39 f2 d1+; 37 a4 g6 38 of the Spassky Variation. 9+p+P+p+q0
g4 f4 39 f2 d5+ 40 e3 e4+ 19...axb5 20 f1 9-+-+-zPl+0
41 d3 h3+ 42 d2 h2+ 43 d3 This is an important decision point 9+-zP-vL-zP-0
h3+=. for Black. There are two distinct
37 e6 g6 is complex but probably lines. 9-zP-sN-+QzP0
better for Black who still has threats 20...fe8 9+-+-tR-mK-0
to the white King and should be 20...h3 is favoured by Nunn in xiiiiiiiiy
able to win at least two of the our book, and has usually been
pawns soon. 38 f2 (38 e7 h1+ preferred but I avoided it because Nobody ever played this before,
39 f2 d1+ 40 g2 xe1 41 xd1 I thought Black may have a to my knowledge, nor was the
e2+! 42 h3 f7) 38...d5+ 39 problem in this line. (Later I found refutation previously published
e3 xe6. Herbrechtsmeier-im which gets anywhere. Indeed, so far as I can
37...xg4 38 e3 f3 39 around the problem.) The rook discover, the position was not
f2 move is probably less clear but discussed. In the famous Readers
39 f1?? g8+ 40 f2 (40 h2 therefore it maybe gives more of Prizyv v. Estrin game, above,
h5#) 40...g2+. winning chances. White played 25 f3 instead. I had to
If 39 xf3 xf3 Black should win, 21 xd5 work out what Estrin intended now
and 39 e6 g8+ probably is also 21 g2 (Kobe-Roskar) should not (since he didnt say in his notes).
good for Black. be good. I didnt give much thought 25...xf4!?
39...g4+ 40 g1 to Whites alternatives in the early I think this must be what Estrin
White acquiesces in a draw. 40 stages, just trusting I could research wanted to keep secret. If he had
e1? g6! could turn nasty for and analyse whatever my opponent found a clear win, would he have
him: 41 g3 h1+ 42 d2 xa1 came up with, but probably I would shown it? Here is a summary of
43 xg4+ f7 when Black wins have answered 21...e2!?. the possibilities I examined over
another pawn to get 2 Rooks v 21...xd5 22 g2 several days.
Rook + 3 pawns. This move was scorned by Nunn a) 25...g5?! 26 fxg5.
40...f3 . Great fun; fantastic (1989) but is often played and is b) 25...h3 could lead to an
drawn game! not easy to refute. immediate repetition, or maybe
22 h3 f5 23 g2 h5!? 24 xd5 not even that?
Game 50 cxd5 25 g2 d3 26 a5 (Better c) 25...c5!? (idea...xf4) was
Thorhallur B. Olafsson is 26 b3 Vitomskis) 26...f5 27 interesting, but White has at least
(Iceland) - f3 e4 28 g1 g6 29 a6 ee6 one good reply in 26 a7 (26 aa1;
Tim Harding (Ireland) 30 h4 e7! was fine for Black in 26 f2?!).
ICCF Officials 50th JT / IM-A, Wallwork-C.Chandler, corr 1989. d) 25...cxd5!? is very interesting but
Email 2001 22 c4 (the only move in ECO) is not necessary: 26 xd5+ (26 a8!?)
Notes by Tim Harding. not dangerous to Black:. 22...f5 26...h8 27 h4 (27 f1 f3 28 d2
1 e4 e5 2 f3 c6 3 b5 a6 4 (22...bxc4 is also possible - Nunn) h3 29 f2 b7) 27...xf4 28
a4 f6 5 00 e7 6 e1 b5 7 23 cxb5 b4! 24 c4 and now both a8!.
b3 00 8 c3 d5 9 exd5 xd5 24...xb5 and 24...xd2= (Nunn) e) 25...c5!? was the obvious
10 xe5 xe5 11 xe5 c6 12 are fine. alternative but it is inconclusive:
d4 d6 13 e1 h4 14 g3 h3 22...h5 23 a6?! 26 f1 f3 (26...f8 27 d2 c5
15 e3 g4 When he played this, I decided repetition) and now:
This was my last Marshall game Olafsson must be aiming for the e1) 27 d2 f8 28 xc6! (28 dxc6!
before finalising this e-book. apparent 24 f4 improvement on xc6 29 xc6 xc6 30 d5+
16 d3 ae8 17 d2 e6 18 the Readers of Prizyv v Estrin ee6=) 28...xc6 29 dxc6 xc6
a4 h5 game. I already began analysing 30 d1! is about equal.
This move, Spasskys second the various possibilities, especially If instead 30 e2 Black is still a
thought in the 18 a4 variation, has the 25...xf4 line. For Whites pawn down but with attacking
the reputation of being solid but alternatives, see the notes to the chances.
not very macho. Estrin game. e2) 27 f2 may be slightly better:
Instead of crude direct threats, 23...f5 27...f8!? (27...xe3 and...xd5
Black will work with subtle touches This move seems obvious; and recovers the pawn but not much
to obtain sufficient positional Blacks attack is good enough for more?) 28 dxc6 xc6.
compensation and draw. at least a draw. The alternative f) Finally, 25...xe3?! does not
That is the official version but in 23...h3 (see Dahne-Rut) scored work: 26 xe3 c5 27 a8+ f7
55 The Total Marshall
28 ae8 e.g. 28...h3 29 f3 See the notes in the database for draw.
g4 30 f2 (30 g2 repeats) detailed variations. Not 28...g4 29 e6 xe6 30 dxe6
30...cxd5 Black regains his pawn 27...g6 e8 31 d4 xg3+ 32 hxg3 a8
but eventually he must capture on XIIIIIIIIY 33 e2 g4 34 e1 and Black has
e3 for full material equality but a 9-+-+r+k+0 only a draw by repetition: 34...h3
positional minus. 35 e2 g4 etc.
26 gxf4 9+-+-+-zpp0 29 hxg3
a) 26 f2?? not possible here 9R+p+-+r+0 XIIIIIIIIY
because h2 hangs after 26...xe3 9+p+P+p+q0 9-+-+r+k+0
27 xe3 xe3. 9-+-+-zP-+0
b) 26 f1?! concedes a good game 9+-+-+-zpp0
9+-zP-vL-wQl0 9-+R+-+-+0
to Black but is the only other
playable move. 9-zP-sN-+-zP0 9+p+P+p+q0
After 26...f3 27 d2 xe3+ and 9+-+-tR-mK-0 9-+-+-zP-+0
...xd5 is again good for Black. Or xiiiiiiiiy 9+-zP-vL-zPl0
if here 27 f2 xe3 28 xe3 xd5
Black has won a pawn because if 29 28 xc6
9-zP-sN-+-+0
xe8+ xe8 30 xf5 then comes I am not sure if this is the right 9+-+-tR-mK-0
30...f6 with a winning attack for choice here; I kept changing my xiiiiiiiiy
Black. mind about it.
c) 26 xf4? xe1+ 27 f1 (27 f2 28 dxc6 is possibly his best try, to This is a critical position that can
e2+) 27...h3 28 a8+ f7 29 make his pawn as dangerous as arise by force from 25 f4. How
a7+ g6 30 e5 (30 f2? d1) possible? 28...xg3+ might then be well does the queen fight against
30...xe5+. premature? (28...b4!? and 28...h6!? assorted material? Black has some
d) 26 f2?! xe3+ (26...h3) 27 are possible.) 29 hxg3 xe3 chances in the main line but at this
xe3 xe3 28 xe3 might be tried (29...g5!? may be better?) 30 a8+ stage I thought a draw seemed
in a pinch, e.g. 28...e8+!? (One (30 xe3 d1+ 31 f2 xd2+ 32 probable. Several moves were
of several possibilities) 29 f2 (29 e2 d8 33 e5 h5 34 e2 g4+ examined here.
d3 d6) 29...e2+ 30 g1 e3+ 35 e3 d1+) 30...f7 31 xe3 29...f7!
31 f2 xf2+ 32 xf2 xh2+ 33 d1+ 32 f2 xd2+ 33 e2 d5 I decided on this after many days
e3 cxd5 and Black is at least one 34 a7+ f6 (34...g6!? 35 c7 c6) analysis. It seemed to give more
pawn up in an endgame. 35 c7 c6!. winning chances than alternatives
26...h3! Not, however, 35...g2+?! 36 e1 by keeping my Rook and/or
26...g6 seems worthless: 27 xc6 xg3+ 37 d1 d3+ 38 c1 c4 eliminating his advanced pawn
(27 f1) 27...h3 28 xg6 xg2 29 39 d2! and I dont see how Black At first I thought 29...g5 30 e6
xg2 when White has far too much can win. In fact he has to be careful (30 f1?? f3) 30...xe6 (30...d8;
for the Queen. Most of the rest of not to lose. 30...h6) 31 dxe6 e8 looked like
the game revolves around working 28...xg3+ a possible way to make progress,
out when the Queen is better, or The result of the game now albeit dangerous. Eventually I
only drawing, or actually worse. depends on the black queens fight decided it was too risky.
The material count is not the only against Whites rook, minor piece 30 c5
factor; the activity of the other and pawns. This is one of only two reasonable
pieces, the strength of passed This sort of material balance arises moves from him, but maybe the
pawns and possible pawn breaks quite often in the Marshall and is inferior of the two?
all come into the equation. not always good for Black. 30 c4 bxc4 (30...g5!?) 31 c5 g5
27 g3! Here Blacks Bishop is potentially looked bad for White.
This must be best. bad and if it cannot contribute 30 d6!? may be necessary, and
a) 27 e2?? g6+ 28 h1 xe3! to a mate then he would like to I had not yet found a clear win
29 a8+ f7 30 a7+ f6 31 e7 exchange it for the white Knight. at the point when my opponent
(31 xe3 allows forced mate by Blacks chances are improved if played 30 c5 instead. On d6
31...g2+ 32 g1 f3+; or 31 xh5 his rook is not exchanged because the Rook prevents...g6 but on
xe1+ 32 f1 xf1#) 31...xe2 32 then it can be responsible for the other hand it may open other
xe2 xe7 33 xe7 g2+ 34 g1 dealing with Whites passed pawn possibilities
xd5+ and wins. and this leaves the queen free 30...g6!
b) 27 f2!? is the main alternative: to do damage without having to White may be lost now. Instead
27...g6+ 28 h1 g2+ 29 undertake defenisve duties. 30...g5!? 31 f3 gxf4 32 xf4 xe1+
xg2 xg2 30 xg2 g4+! Of course Black wants a kingside 33 xe1 a7 34 d3 a1+ 35 f2
(30...cxd5 allows consolidation pawn breakthrough if possible, f1+ 36 e3 g1+ probably only
by 31 f3) and now 31 f2 (the because as we shall see this draws.
critical reply) 31...h4+ 32 f1 simplifies the win. 31 f2
(32 e2? xe3+ 33 xe3 xe1+ 34 Black must watch for counterplay 31 h2 is perhaps no better. If 31
d3 cxd5+) 32...h3+ (32...g5!? based on Whites passed pawn and f2? xe1+ 32 xe1 e8 33 f2
also comes into consideration.) 33 he must also avoid positions later in (33 f2 g4) 33...e2.
f2 xh2+ 34 f1 with several the game where a rook and pawns 31...g4 32 f3
possible lines for Black here, he might set up a barricade against the If 32 d4?! xe1 33 xe1 e8+ 34
should win. black queen and obtain a positional e5 h5. Now White can pick off
The Total Marshall 56
Games to play though online Links to all the important chess sites