(1) Aperturas con blancas - Conceptos generales [A00]

27.05.2019
[José Carlos Celaya]
Objetivos del juego en la apertura para el blanco: dominar ell centro, desarrollar las piezas
menores ( alfiles y caballos) a buenas casillas de desarrollo ( es decir cerca del centro o atacando
piezas enemigas que ejercen control sobre el centro), poner al rey en seguridad con el enroque,
desarrollar la dama y finalmente ocupar con las torres las columnas centrales. Recuerde que debe
hacer la menor cantidad de jugadas de peón en el enroque porque el rey es la pieza más sensible..
El centro ( casillas d4-d5-e4-e5) es un sector clave durante todo el juego, ya que las principales
digonales lo atraviezan y una pieza colocada en el centro triploca su poder.Veamos algunas
aperturas como modelo. Comenzamos con la Defensa Escandinava ( 1 ... d5). 1.e4 d5 Esta jugada
es el modo más radical de luchar contra la dominación central blanca. Tiene el defecto de poner en
juego la dama y permitir que el blanco gane un tiempo con ¤c3, pero a cambio el negro realiza el
golpe ideal d5 en las aperturas abiertas o de peón de rey. 2.exd5 Las blancas deben tomar
obligadas. 2...£xd5

XABCDEFGHY
8rsnl+kvlntr(
7zppzp-zppzpp'
6-+-+-+-+&
5+-+q+-+-%
4-+-+-+-+$
3+-+-+-+-#
2PzPPzP-zPPzP"
1tRNvLQmKLsNR!
xabcdefghy
La jugada principal. [A veces, las negras eligen 2...¤f6

XABCDEFGHY
8rsnlwqkvl-tr(
7zppzp-zppzpp'
6-+-+-sn-+&
5+-+P+-+-%
4-+-+-+-+$
3+-+-+-+-#
2PzPPzP-zPPzP"
1tRNvLQmKLsNR!
 xabcdefghy
tentando a que las blancas intenten quedarse con un peón de más. 3.c4 c6 4.dxc6 ¤xc6 y las
negras se quedan con el control de la casila d4 y el peón de menos no se nota. 5.¤c3 e5 6.d3 ¥f5
7.¥g5 (7.¤f3 e4 8.dxe4 ¤xe4 9.¥e2 (9.£xd8+!? ¦xd8 10.¥e2 (10.¤xe4 ¥xe4 11.¥e2 ¤b4 12.0–0
¤c2©) 10...¥b4 11.¥d2 ¤xd2 12.¤xd2 ¤d4 13.¥d1 0–0 14.0–0 ¦fe8©) 9...¥b4 10.¥d2 ¤xd2 11.¤xd2
¤d4 12.¦c1 0–0 13.¤f1 £g5 14.¤e3 ¦ad8 15.h4 £f4 16.0–0 ¥xc3 17.¦xc3 ¤b5! Ataca la £ y la ¦c3.
18.cxb5 (18.£c1 ¤xc3 19.£xc3 ¦fe8 20.g3 £e5 21.£xe5 (21.£c1 ¥d3 22.¥xd3 ¦xd3 mejor las negras)
21...¦xe5 Las negras tienen una pequeña ventaja en el final ya que cuentan con torre contra caballo
y peón.) 18...¦xd1 19.¦xd1 ¥e6 20.¦a3 £b8 21.¦a4 g6 22.¥c4 ¥xc4 23.¦xc4 £e5 24.a4 £xb2 25.g3 ¦e8
26.¦cd4 ¦e7 27.¦1d2 £b1+ 28.¢g2 h5 29.¦c4 ¢g7 30.¦cd4 ¦c7 31.¦d1 ¦c1 32.¦xc1 £xc1 33.¦f4 £c5
34.¢h2 ¢g8 35.¦c4 £d6 36.¦f4 £e6 37.¢g2 ¢g7 38.¦c4 £d7 39.¢g1 £d6 40.¢g2 £e6 41.¢g1 a6 42.bxa6
£xa6 43.¦b4 £c6 44.¦c4 £d6 45.¢g2 £a3 46.¢g1 £b3 47.¢g2 ¢f8 48.¢g1 ¢g7 ½–½ Savchenko,B
(2562)-Asrian,K (2634)/Moscow 2007) 7...¥b4 8.£c2 (8.a3? pierde tiempo pues no desarrolla
ninguna pieza (las jugadas de peón non jugadas de desarrollo, si bien son necesarias para dominar
el centro y abrir el paso a los alfiles y la dama). 8...¥xc3+ 9.bxc3 £a5 "Tocando" el peón c3. Assí
impiden que el blanco se desarrolle comodamente. 10.¥d2 (Mejor es 10.£b3 poniendo en juego la
dama. 10...¦d8 11.¥xf6 gxf6 12.¦d1 y las blancas podrán seguir con ¤f3, ¥e2 y 0–0, con un peón de
ventaja, pero las negras pueden debiltar a las blancas ya que ttienen más piezas en juego. Dado
que las blancas tienen peones doblados en c3-c4, el peón de más de las blancas no sirve de mucho.
En este caso el juego estaría equilibrado. Las blancas tien peón de más deficiente y las negras tiene
todas sus piezas en juego. Habría una larga batalla por delante.) 10...0–0–0 Observe el juego del
negro: ya tiene todas piezas menores en juego y el rey en seguridad y sus torres pueden ocupar las
columnas centrales. El blanco tiene dos piezas "adentro", el ¥f1 y el ¤g1 y no puede enrocars en el
flanco dama porque este flanco está destozado. 11.d4? Jugada mala. No hay que abrir el juego
cuando estamos inferiores en desarrollo (menos piezas en juego). Además esta jugada le permite al
negro traer sus torres al juego. 11...exd4 12.cxd4 ¦he8+ Observe como al precio de un peón las
negras cumplieron todos los objetivos básicos de la apertura. 13.¥e2 £b6 Atacan el §d4. Cuando un
bando posee ventaja en desarrolo debe impedir que el otro bando complete el suyo. 14.d5 ¤d4
Amenaza ganar una torre por un caballo con ... ¤c2+ 15.¢f1 ¤xe2 16.¤xe2 ¥d3 Amenaza ganar el
¤e2. 17.¥e3 ¦xe3!! 18.fxe3 £xe3 Amenaza ganar con ... ¤g4 con mate en f2. 19.¢e1 ¤e4 Amenaza
ganar con ... ¤c3. 20.¦f1 ¥xe2!! Para dar el jaque £c3+ y ganar la ¦ blanca. 21.£xe2 £c3+ 22.¢d1
£xa1+ 0–1 Olah,Z (2225)-Harmatosi,J (2242)/Budapest 2003) 8...¤d4 9.£a4+ ¥d7 10.£d1 £a5
11.¥d2 0–0 12.a3 ¥xc3 13.¥xc3 £b6 14.¥xd4? exd4 15.£c2 ¦fe8+ 16.¤e2 ¦ac8 17.£d2 ¤g4 18.h3 ¤e5
19.0–0–0 ¥a4 20.¦e1 ¤xc4 21.dxc4 ¦xc4+ 22.¤c3 ¦xe1+ 23.£xe1 dxc3 24.b4 £h6+ 25.£e3 ¦e4!! 0–1
Lokshin,M-Ivanov,M (2510)/Moscow 1996(25...¦e4 Si la blancas capturan la dama negra 26.£xh6
reciben mate con ¦e8 26...¦e1# ) ] 3.¤c3 £d6 [es mejor ¹3...£a5

XABCDEFGHY
8rsnl+kvlntr(
7zppzp-zppzpp'
6-+-+-+-+&
5wq-+-+-+-%
4-+-+-+-+$
 3+-sN-+-+-#
2PzPPzP-zPPzP"
1tR-vLQmKLsNR!
xabcdefghy
4.d4 ¤f6 5.¤f3 ¥g4 6.h3 ¥h5 7.g4?! las blancas debilitan demasiado su enroque. (Es mejor 7.¥d2 e6
8.¥c4 c6 9.£e2 ¥b4 10.g4 las blancas juegan g4 pues enrocarán largo y la debilidad entonces no
tiene importancia, ya que no está cerca el rey. 10...¥g6 11.0–0–0 ¤bd7 12.¢b1 0–0–0 13.a3 ¥xc3
14.¥xc3 £c7 15.¥d2 ¤e4 16.¥c1 ¤b6 17.¥d3 ¤d6 18.¤e5 ¥xd3 19.¦xd3 h5 20.¦hd1² Peón central
(§d4). 20...hxg4 21.hxg4 ¦h7 22.b3 f6 23.¤f3 £f7 24.c4 ¤d7 25.£e1 ¤f8 26.¢b2 g5 27.a4 ¦h8 28.¥e3
a6 29.d5 cxd5 30.cxd5 e5 31.£a5 ¤c4+ 32.bxc4 e4 33.¦b3 exf3 34.£c5+ 1–0 Dolmatov,S (2540)-
Rogers,I (2485)/Tallinn 1985) 7...¥g6 8.¤e5 e6 9.¥g2 c6 10.0–0 ¤bd7 11.f4 0–0–0 12.£e2÷ El juego
es complejo ya que las blancas tienen más espacio (§g4 y §d4) pero su flanco rey es débil por los
peones avanzados. 12...¥b4 13.¤c4 £a6 14.a3 ¥e7 15.b4 ¤b6 16.¤xb6+ £xb6 17.¥e3 ¦xd4? (Era
mejor 17...£c7 seguido de ¦he8, completando el desarrolo y preparando las jugadas liberadoras ...
e5 o ... c5. El blanco cuenta con ventaja de espacio pero el negro puede maniobrar tranquilo con
sus piezas. Si el blanco quiere atacar tendrá que debilitarse con algún avance de peón. 18.¦ad1
¦he8 19.b5 ¤d5 20.£d2 ¤xe3 21.£xe3 c5=) 18.£f2 ¦hd8 19.¤a4 £a6 20.¥xd4 £xa4 21.c3 h5 22.f5
exf5 23.gxf5 ¥h7 24.£g3 £b3 25.¦ab1 £a2 26.¦be1 ¥d6 27.£h4 £xa3 28.¦a1 £b2 29.¦xa7 ¢b8 30.¦fa1
¢c7 31.¦7a2 £b3 32.£f2 ¦e8 33.¥b6+ ¢d7 34.¦d2 ¤d5 35.¥xd5 cxd5 36.¦ad1 ¦e5 37.£g2 ¥xf5 38.¦xd5
¦xd5 39.£xd5 £xd5 40.¦xd5 ¢e6 41.¦b5 h4 42.¥d4 g5 43.¦b6 ¢d5 44.¦xb7 ¥xh3 45.¦b5+ ¢c4 46.¦xg5
¥d7 47.¥e5 ¥e7 48.¦g7 ¥e6 49.¦h7 h3 50.¢h2 ¥g5 51.¦xh3 f6 52.¥d4 ¥xh3 53.¢xh3 f5 54.¢g3 ¥d2
55.¢f3 ¥g5 56.¥e5 ¥d2 57.¢g3 ¥c1 58.¥f4 ¥b2 59.¥d2 ¢d3 60.¥e1 ¢e2 61.¥f2 ¥xc3 62.b5 ¥e5+ 0–1
Blanco,C (2362)-Munoz Pantoja,M (2478)/Ampolla 2008; También puede jugarse 3...£d8

XABCDEFGHY
8rsnlwqkvlntr(
7zppzp-zppzpp'
6-+-+-+-+&
5+-+-+-+-%
4-+-+-+-+$
3+-sN-+-+-#
2PzPPzP-zPPzP"
1tR-vLQmKLsNR!
xabcdefghy
pero el blanco tene clara ventaja por el tiempo ganado en la apertura ¤c3 y le toca jugar (dos
tiempos de ventaja son muchos en la apertura) 4.d4 ¤f6 5.¤f3 ¥g4 6.h3 ¥xf3 7.£xf3 c6 (7...£xd4?
8.£xb7+- gana la Ra8) 8.¥e3 e6 9.¥d3 ¤bd7 10.0–0 ¥e7 11.¤e2 0–0 12.c4 ¦e8 13.¦ad1 £a5 14.¤c3
¦ad8 15.a3 ¤f8 16.¦fe1² Las blancas tienen una pequeña ventaja, gracias a que dominan más
espacio (§c4-§d4) y las negras tendrán restringidos sus movimientos. 16...¤g6 17.g3 ¦d7 18.¦d2
¦ed8 19.¦ed1 a6 20.¥f1 b5 Las negras deben jugar así sino serán ahogadas lentamente. El blanco va
presionando despacio ya que tiene ventaja de espacio. 21.£xc6 ¦c7 22.£g2 bxc4 23.d5 exd5
24.¤xd5 ¤xd5 25.¦xd5 ¦xd5 26.¦xd5 £e1 27.£f3 h6 28.¢g2 ¥f6 29.¦d2 ¢h7 30.£d5 £c1 31.£f5 c3
32.¦c2 £a1 33.¥d3 ¦b7 34.h4 ¦b5 35.£d7 £a2 36.bxc3 1–0 Navara,D (2708)-Szabo,G (2525)/Rijeka
2010/CBM 136] 4.d4 ¤f6 5.¤f3 c6!? Esta jugada es clave en esta defensa pues le facilita a la £
negra retiradas del centro si es atcada. 6.¤e5 ¤bd7 7.¤c4 £c7 8.£f3! ¤b6 9.¥f4 £d7 10.¥e5
£g4² las blancas tienen una pequeña ventaja de espacio ya que tienen un peón en el centro (§d4) y
las negras ninguno. Pero sin damas es difícil montar un ataque para las blancas, por eso es
pequeña ventaja. 11.£e3 £e6 12.¤xb6 axb6 13.¥e2 ¤d7 14.0–0 f6 15.¥c7 £xe3 16.fxe3 g6
17.a4 ¥h6 18.¢f2 0–0 19.¥c4+ ¢g7 20.¦ae1 ¦e8 21.¢g1 ¦a5 22.b4 ¦a8 23.b5 e5 24.¥b3 e4
25.h3 ¢h8 26.¥d6 ¢g7 27.g4 ¥g5 28.¥g3 h5 29.h4 ¥h6 30.gxh5 gxh5 31.¥f4 ¥xf4 32.¦xf4
¤f8 33.¤xe4 1–0 Iordachescu,V (2607)-Boguslavsky,O (2442)/Bad Wiessee 2009/EXT 2010 Line

(2) Defensa Escandinava - Partidas modelo negras [B01]

1.e4 d5 2.exd5 £xd5 La Defensa Escandinava brinda chances de juego al negro ya que pone
rápidamente en juego la dama (la pieza más poderosa). Las partidas siguientes nos muestran como
deben poner en juego sus piezas las negras y que planes llevar a cabo (en general el enroque largo,
ya que desarrollaron la dama, y avance con las piezas y peones contra el enroque blanco). Por
supuesto que hay muchas partidas ganadas por las blancas pero en este artículo nos centramos en
el juego negro. 3.¤c3 £a5 Esta es la más común[pero las negras disponen de 3...£d6 Una
especialidad de Caruana, un jugador fortísimo, que este año jugó contra Carlsen por el campeonato
del mundo.. ; y 3...£d8 una especialidad de Nakamura.] Line

(3) Dominguez Perez,Leinier (2726) - Caruana,Fabiano (2786) [B01]

Tashkent FIDE GP 2nd Tashkent (7), 29.11.2012
[Mekhitarian]
1.e4 d5 2.exd5 £xd5 3.¤c3 £d6 4.d4 ¤f6 5.¤f3 g6 6.¥c4 ¥g7 7.0–0 0–0 8.h3 a6 9.¦e1 [9.a4 is
normally played. Here Dominguez doesn't stop b5, perhaps inteding to explore the queenside
weaknesses later, but Caruana plays c5 2 moves later, so I don't quite understand why allow b5-
¥b7 in the first place. A recent example (not quite successful) is from the top specialist in the £d6
Scandinavian - S. Tiviakov 9...¤c6 10.b3 ¤e8 11.¥a3 £d8 12.¦e1 ¤d6 13.¥d5 ¥d7 14.£d3 and it
seems White has built up a great opening position, and is indeed looking for an advantage 14...e6
15.¥xc6 ¥xc6 16.¤e5 ¥e8 17.¦ad1± ½–½ Vovk,A (2549)-Tiviakov,S (2656)/Altenkirchen
2012/Mega2012 Update 24 (67)] 9...b5 10.¥b3 [10.¥d3 ¥b7 11.a4 b4 12.¤e4 also doesn't bring
much, because Black equalises right away: 12...¤xe4 13.¥xe4 ¥xe4 14.¦xe4 c5=] 10...¥b7 11.¥g5
c5! Right on time, solving Black's opening problems indeed, and also avoiding any kind of £e2-¦ad1
disturbances. 12.dxc5 £xc5 13.£e2 e6 14.¦ad1 ¤bd7= ³, it feels like White is the one that has to
play properly now. His pieces are active, but Black's structure is very good and the e6-§ controls the
position very well. This is a typical Sicilian-like structure, when Black was already able to play d5
and exchange White's e4-§, not to mention the awkardly placed b3-¥. 15.¥f4 ¦fe8 16.¥d6 £b6
Now to follow calmly with ¦ac8, ¦c6, or just ¥f8, again trying to play against the passive b3-¥. ¤c5 is
another possible idea. 17.£e3 £xe3 18.¦xe3 ¤b6 19.¥e5 ¦ac8 20.¦ed3 ¤c4 Caruana forces White
to get rid of his passive-¥, but he is now looking for a different advantage, the ¥ vs ¤ fight.
[20...¤e4!? was another way to play the position 21.¥xg7 ¢xg7 22.¤xe4 ¥xe4 23.¦d6 ¥xf3 24.gxf3
¦b8³ with ¢f6-¢e7 to come and after a slow re-grouping, Black could try something in this endgame,
where the white-¥ remains passive.] 21.¥xc4 ¦xc4 22.a3 h6 [22...¤d5 23.¥xg7 ¢xg7 24.¤xd5
¥xd5= ³, would be a better version of the game, with a pleasant endgame for Black and a
microscopic advantage, if there's any.] 23.¤d2 ¦cc8 24.¥xf6! Forcing the subsequent exchanges:
24...¥xf6 25.¤de4 ¥xc3 26.¤xc3 ¥c6 In this kind of endgames, Black is always more comfortable,
because the ¢-side majority has better prospects than the £-side one, since the ¥ plays amazingly
well with the 4 ¦s still in the game. 27.¦1d2 [27.h4= /³, exchanging a § would be a good decision,
trying to follow with f3-¢f2-¢e3.] 27...g5 28.¦d6 ¢f8 29.¤d1 ¢e7 30.¤e3 h5 Now Black could be
eyeing the g2-§ (by playing h4!). That's why I liked the h4-move earlier. Besides, a rule of thumb in
the ¤ vs ¥ fight is to try to 'bring' the §s as close to the centre as possible (in this case, without the
'h' §s, the ¤ would be working better, since it's 'closer' to the §s). 31.c4?? A blunder, because White
won't be able to take the § back. [31.f3 and ¢f2 to follow was the natural way to play the position.]
31...bxc4µ 32.¦6d4 [32.¤xc4 ¥d5 33.b3 ¦xc4! maybe this was missed by Dominguez 34.¦6xd5
exd5 35.bxc4 dxc4–+ should be easily winning for Black.] 32...¥b5 33.h4 ¦g8 Preferring to
maintain the ¢-side flexible. [33...g4µ was the other way to play the position, the safest one I think,
getting space on the ¢-side and preparing to follow with c3 opening lines or even f5 and a possible
central expansion 34.¦c2 f5! 35.¤xc4 e5–+ This is the difference, now White doesn't have e4
available for his ¦.] 34.¢h2 [34.¦c2!? could be a little bit annoying 34...g4 one of the reasons I think
33...g4 would be more precise 35.¤xc4 e5 36.¦e4 f6 37.¦c3 ¢e6 and Black retains a clear advantage,
because White's pieces are oddly placed, and his structure remains better. But again, I don't think
allowing this was necessary.] 34...c3 35.¦c2 cxb2 36.¦xb2 Now we're talking about the same
endgame as before, but Black has an extra pawn, which makes things easier than before. Naturally,
there's still a fight going on. 36...¦c5 37.a4 ¥c6 38.¦b6 a5 39.hxg5 ¦gxg5 It's interesting to
notice how strong ¥s are in this kind of positions. Our c6 fellow plays an important role attacking g2,
and at the same time protects the black ¢ on his march through e6 (after e5!). 40.¦a6 e5?! [40...f5!
with the same idea was more precise, since White doesn't have the ¦c4 trick.] 41.¦a7+? [41.¦c4!
would be a strong and unexpected try 41...¦xg2+ 42.¢h3 ¦xc4 43.¤xc4 ¦g6! (43...¥e4 44.¦xa5„ f6
45.¦a7+ and after ¤d6, Black is not going to stabilise, and won't be able to bring home the full point.
For example: 45...¢d8 46.¤d6 ¥d5 47.¤f7+ ¢e8 48.¤d6+ ¢f8 49.¦a5 ¥f3 50.¦a7!=) 44.¦xa5 f6
45.¤xe5! fxe5 46.¦xe5+ ¢f6 47.¦xh5 ¥xa4 and the famous ¦¥ vs ¦ endgame would arrive. Drawn, in
theory, but with huge winning chances, as we all know. In 2012 for example, we had had the
famous Grischuk - Kamsky in Olympiad, that ended up in 0–1.] 41...¢e6 42.¦d8 f5! g2-§ becomes a
real target now. And, as said before, the c6-¥ shows its strong defensive potential. 43.¦h8 ¦g6
44.¦hh7 f4 45.¦ae7+ ¢d6 46.¤f5+ ¢d5 47.¦xh5 ¥xa4 The a-§ will be decisive, as will become
clear soon. 48.¦a7? [48.g3 last chance for something 48...fxg3+ 49.¤xg3 ¦e6µ] 48...¢c4! 49.¦h8
¥c2 50.¤h4 ¦b6–+ Showing an amazing control of the endgame, Caruana built this position to
perfection, and nothing can stop his win now. This move allows the black-¢ to the 'b' file, and the
further advance of the a-§. It's all going to be over soon, since Black is well coordinated and the
pawn will just march to a1 51.¤f3 a4 52.¤g5 ¢b4 53.¦ha8 ¦h6+! 54.¤h3 ¥b3 55.f3 ¦c2 56.¢g1
¦d6 57.¦e8 ¦dd2 58.¦g7 a3 59.¦xe5 a2 60.¦e1 ¦b2 61.¢h2 ¦b1 62.¦e4+ ¢c5 63.¦a7 a1£
64.¦xa1 ¦xa1 x 65.¤xf4 ¦a4 66.¦e5+ ¢d6 67.¦f5 ¥c2 68.¦f7 ¢e5 69.¢g3 ¦d8 70.¤h3 ¦g8+
71.¢h2 ¦h4 72.¦c7 ¥f5 73.¦c5+ ¢e6 74.g4 ¦gh8 75.¦xf5 ¦xh3+ 76.¢g2 ¦h2+ 77.¢g3 ¦8h3+
78.¢f4 ¦f2 79.¦e5+ ¢f6 80.¦e3 ¦a2 81.g5+ ¢f7 82.¢g4 ¦h1 83.¦b3 ¦g1+ 0–1

(4) Karjakin,Sergey (2782) - Nakamura,Hikaru (2784) [B01]

Moscow Tal Memorial 8th Blitz Moscow (9), 12.06.2013
1.e4 d5 2.exd5 £xd5 3.¤c3 £a5 4.d4 c6 5.¤f3 ¥f5 6.¥d3 ¥xd3 7.£xd3 £a6 8.£xa6 ¤xa6 9.¥d2 e6
10.¤e4 ¤b4 11.¥xb4 ¥xb4+ 12.c3 ¥e7 13.a4 a5 14.¤e5 ¤f6 15.¤xf6+ gxf6 16.¤d3 f5 17.0–0–0 ¥d6
18.¢c2 ¢e7 19.g3 h5 20.h4 ¦hg8 21.¦de1 ¢f6 22.¦e3 ¦ad8 23.¦he1 ¦g4 24.¤e5 ¥xe5 25.¦xe5 ¦d5
26.¢d3 f4 27.¦5e4 ¦f5 28.¦1e2 fxg3 29.¦xg4 gxf2 30.¦xf2 hxg4 31.¦g2 ¦f4 32.¢e3 ¢f5 33.h5 ¦f3+
34.¢e2 ¢g5 35.h6 ¦h3 36.¦f2 f5 0–1
(5) Gashimov,Vugar (2758) - Kramnik,Vladimir (2772) [B01]
Wch Blitz 5th Moscow (31), 18.11.2009
1.e4 d5 2.exd5 £xd5 3.¤c3 £d6 4.d4 ¤f6 5.¤f3 g6 6.¥g5 ¥g7 7.£d2 0–0 8.0–0–0 a6 9.¥d3
¥g4 10.¤e4? Un error ya que la £ negra atacará el ¥e4 y el §a2 ganando. 10...¤xe4 11.¥xe4 £e6!
12.£f4 ¥xf3 13.£xf3 £xa2 14.¥xe7?? las blancas creían que luego de la retirada de la Rf8
ganarían material con ¥xb7, pero les espera un sorpresa. En realidad se colgaron (término que
significa que cometieron un gran error. 14...¥h6+ [14...¥h6+ 15.¦d2™ £a1#] 0–1

(6) Dominguez Perez,Leinier (2725) - Ivanchuk,Vassily (2764) [B01]

Capablanca Memorial Elite 47th Havana (7), 11.05.2012
[Knaak,R]
1.e4 d5 2.exd5 £xd5 3.¤c3 £a5 4.d4 ¤f6 5.¥d2 c6 6.¥d3 ¥g4 7.f3 ¥h5 8.¤ge2 ¤bd7 9.¤f4
¥g6 10.¤xg6 hxg6 11.£e2 e6 12.¤e4 ¥b4 13.c3 ¥e7 14.g3 ¤xe4 15.fxe4 ¥g5! 16.0–0 ¥xd2
17.£xd2 c5 18.£f2 0–0 19.e5! ¦ad8 20.¥e4 cxd4 21.cxd4 ¤b8!! 22.¦ad1 [22.¥xb7?! £b6
23.¥g2 £xd4 ] 22...¤c6 23.¦d3 £b6 24.¦fd1 ¦d7 25.¦b3 £a6 26.¦a3 £b5 27.¥xc6 bxc6! 28.¦f1?!
[28.¦c3 ¦fd8 29.¦f1 ] 28...f5! 29.b3? [29.exf6 ¦xf6 30.¦f3 ; 29.¦c1! ¦fd8 30.¦b3 £a4 31.¦a3 ] 29...¦fd8
30.¦a4 c5! 31.dxc5 ¦d2! 32.£f3 £xc5+ 33.¢h1 £c2 34.¦c4 [34.¦h4 g5 35.¦h5 ¦d1 ] 34...£xa2
35.¦h4 g5 36.¦h5 g4 37.£c6 £xb3 38.¦g5 ¦d1 0–1

(7) Vidit,S (2702) - Nakamura,Hi (2746) [B01]

Tata Steel India Blitz Kolkata IND (17.5), 14.11.2018
1.e4 d5 2.exd5 £xd5 3.¤c3 £d8 4.d4 ¤f6 5.¤f3 g6 6.h3 ¥g7 7.¥c4 0–0 8.0–0 a6 9.a4 ¤c6
10.¥e3 e6 11.£d2 ¤e7 12.¥h6 b6 13.¥xg7 ¢xg7 14.¦ad1 ¥b7 15.¤e5 £d6 16.¦fe1 ¦ad8
17.¤e2 b5! 18.axb5 axb5 19.¥b3 [19.¥xb5? £d5 gana el ¥ por la amenaza de mate en g2.]
19...c5= Las negras se liberan en el centro. 20.c3 ¤c6 21.£e3 c4 22.¥c2 ¤d5 23.£g3 ¤ce7
24.h4 f6 25.¤g4 ¤f5 Las negras buscan el final(juego sin damas) ya que todas sus piezas tienen
buen juego. 26.£xd6 ¦xd6 27.g3 ¦a8 28.¦a1 ¦da6 29.¦xa6 ¦xa6 30.¤c1 ¢f7 31.¤h2 b4 32.¥xf5
gxf5 33.¤e2 ¦a2 34.¦b1 ¤b6 35.f3 ¤d5 36.cxb4 ¤xb4 37.¤c3 ¦a7 38.b3 cxb3 39.¦xb3 ¤d3
40.¤b5 ¦a1+ 41.¢g2 ¦a2+ 42.¢g1 ¦a1+ 43.¢g2 ¤e1+ 44.¢f2 ¥d5 45.¦c3 ¦d1 46.¢e2 ¦b1
47.¤c7 ¥b7 48.h5 ¢e7 49.g4 ¢d7 50.gxf5 exf5 51.d5 ¤g2 52.¢f2 ¤f4 53.¢e3 ¤g2+ 54.¢d4
¦d1+ 55.¦d3 ¦xd3+ 56.¢xd3 ¢xc7 57.¢d4 ¢d6 0–1

(8) Frolyanov,D (2517) - Nakamura,Hi (2746) [B01]

World Blitz 2018 St Petersburg RUS (1.2), 29.12.2018
1.e4 d5 2.exd5 £xd5 3.¤c3 £d8 4.d4 ¤f6 5.¤f3 g6 6.¥e2 ¥g7 7.0–0 0–0 8.¥g5 h6 9.¥f4 ¤c6 10.¦e1 b6
11.¥c4 ¥b7 12.¤e5 e6 13.¤xc6 ¥xc6 14.¥e5 £d7 15.¥e2 b5 16.¥f3 b4 17.¥xc6 £xc6 18.¤e2 ¦ad8
19.¤g3 ¤d7 20.¥xg7 ¢xg7 21.£e2 ¤f6 22.¦ad1 ¦d5 23.¦d3 ¦fd8 24.¦ed1 £a6 25.a3 bxa3 26.¦xa3 £b6
27.¦b3 £d6 28.¦bd3 ¦b5 29.b3 ¦a5 30.h3 ¦a2 31.¦3d2 £c6 32.£e5 ¦d5 33.£e2 ¦da5 34.¤f1 ¤d5 35.£e5+
¢g8 36.c4 ¤c3 37.d5 ¤xd1 38.¦xd1 £b6 39.£f6 exd5 40.£d8+ ¢g7 41.¤e3 dxc4 42.¦d7 £f6 43.£xf6+
¢xf6 44.¤xc4 ¦c5 45.¤e3 ¦c1+ 46.¢h2 ¢e5 0–1

(9) Karjakin,Sergey (2782) - Nakamura,Hikaru (2784) [B01]

Moscow Tal Memorial 8th Blitz Moscow (9), 12.06.2013
1.e4 d5 2.exd5 £xd5 3.¤c3 £a5 4.d4 c6 5.¤f3 ¥f5 6.¥d3 ¥xd3 7.£xd3 £a6 8.£xa6 ¤xa6 9.¥d2 e6
10.¤e4 ¤b4 11.¥xb4 ¥xb4+ 12.c3 ¥e7 13.a4 a5 14.¤e5 ¤f6 15.¤xf6+ gxf6 16.¤d3 f5 17.0–0–0 ¥d6
18.¢c2 ¢e7 19.g3 h5 20.h4 ¦hg8 21.¦de1 ¢f6 22.¦e3 ¦ad8 23.¦he1 ¦g4 24.¤e5 ¥xe5 25.¦xe5 ¦d5
26.¢d3 f4 27.¦5e4 ¦f5 28.¦1e2 fxg3 29.¦xg4 gxf2 30.¦xf2 hxg4 31.¦g2 ¦f4 32.¢e3 ¢f5 33.h5 ¦f3+
34.¢e2 ¢g5 35.h6 ¦h3 36.¦f2 f5 0–1

(10) Wei Yi (2740) - Ivanchuk,Vassily (2732) [B01]

Ivanchuk-Wei Yi m TB 2017 Hoogeveen NED (2), 26.10.2017
1.e4 d5 2.exd5 £xd5 3.¤c3 £a5 4.d4 c6 5.¥d2 ¥f5 6.¥c4 e6 7.£f3 ¤d7 8.0–0–0 ¤gf6 9.¤ge2
£c7 10.h3 h6 11.¦he1 0–0–0 12.¢b1 ¥d6 13.g4 ¥h7 14.¤f4 e5 15.dxe5 ¤xe5 16.£e2 ¦he8
17.¥e3 ¤xc4 18.£xc4 b5 Las blancas pierden el ¤f4. 0–1

(11) Sutovsky,Emil (2687) - Van Wely,Loek (2691) [B01]

Istanbul (Olympiad) Istanbul, 2012
[RR]
1.e4 d5 2.exd5 £xd5 3.¤c3 £a5 4.d4 ¤f6 5.¤f3

XABCDEFGHY
8rsnl+kvl-tr(
7zppzp-zppzpp'
6-+-+-sn-+&
5wq-+-+-+-%
4-+-zP-+-+$
3+-sN-+N+-#
2PzPP+-zPPzP"
1tR-vLQmKL+R!
xabcdefghy
5...c6 6.¥d2 ¥f5 7.¤e5 [7.¤e4 — 111/43 Ver partida siguiente.] 7...¤bd7 8.g4 ¥e6 9.f4N [9.¤c4;
9.¤xd7; 9.g5] 9...0–0–0 10.£f3?? [10.¤c4÷] 10...¤xe5 11.dxe5 ¦xd2! 12.exf6 ¦xc2 13.¥d3 ¦xb2
14.¦c1 exf6 15.0–0 h5 16.g5 fxg5 17.¤d1 ¥c5+ 18.¢h1 g4 0–1

(12) Starostits,Ilmars (2471) - Hamdouchi,Hicham (2601) [B01]

Sevilla op35 Sevilla ESP (6), 13.01.2010
[Hamdouchi,Hicham]
1.e4 d5 Normalmente juego 1...c5 pero vi que mi oponente juega bien la cerrada con 2.Cc3 y 3.g3
2.exd5 £xd5 3.¤c3 £a5 4.d4 ¤f6 5.¤f3 c6 6.¥d2 ¥f5 7.¤e4 [7.¥c4 e6 8.¤d5 £d8 9.¤xf6+ es la
variante principal pero Starostits tenía otra idea] 7...£b6 Desde b6 la Dama presiona b2 y d4
8.¤xf6+ gxf6 En esta variante las negras quedan con buen juego, ya quesi bien tiene peones
deficientes (f7-f6) pero a cambio tienen una columna, la g, para sus torres. 9.b4

Un fuerte GM que juega esta posición con blancas es Oleg Korneev. La idea es atacar en el flanco
de dama si las negras juegan 0–0–0 9...¦g8 Al parecer una novedad. Se jugaron 9...e6, 9...e5 o
9...Cd7. Mi idea es impedir el desarrollo del Af1 a la activa casilla c4 10.¦b1 [10.¥e2 ¤d7 11.c3 0–0–
0 12.0–0 ¥h3 13.¤h4 e5 14.¥e3 £c7 15.¢h1 resolvería el problema del desarrollo blanco; 10.¥c4
¦xg2! 11.¤h4 £xd4 12.¤xg2 (12.¥xf7+ ¢xf7 13.¤xg2 ¥g4 14.f3 (14.£c1 £e4+ 15.¢f1 ¥f3–+)
14...¥xf3) 12...£xc4µ; 10.¤h4 ¥xc2 11.£xc2 £xd4 12.0–0–0 £xh4] 10...¤d7

XABCDEFGHY
8r+-+kvlr+(
7zpp+nzpp+p'
6-wqp+-zp-+&
5+-+-+l+-%
4-zP-zP-+-+$
3+-+-+N+-#
2P+PvL-zPPzP"
1+R+QmKL+R!
xabcdefghy
11.¦b3 Para jugar c4 pero el Rey blanco se queda en el centro. Quizás es mejor [11.¥e2 para jugar
0–0 ya que 11...¦xg2 no vale por 12.¤h4 ¦xf2 13.¢xf2 £xd4+ 14.¢g3! ¡y no pasa nada!] 11...e5
12.¥e3 £c7 13.dxe5

XABCDEFGHY
8r+-+kvlr+(
7zppwqn+p+p'
6-+p+-zp-+&
5+-+-zPl+-%
4-zP-+-+-+$
3+R+-vLN+-#
2P+P+-zPPzP"
1+-+QmKL+R!
xabcdefghy
Retrasando el desarrollo. 13...¥e6! Obliga a las blancas a debilitarse más. 14.c4 [14.¦d3 ¥xb4+
15.c3 ¥a5µ] 14...0–0–0 amenazando Cc5 15.£c2 ¤xe5 16.¤xe5 [16.¤d4 ¤g4! 17.¤xe6 fxe6 18.£e4
£d7µ] 16...£xe5µ Las negras disponen de mucha actividad y tienen muchas ideas como Ah6, Af5 o
f5-f4 17.f4 ¥xb4+!–+ ganando un peón 18.¢f2 [18.¦xb4 £xe3+] 18...£a5 19.¦xb4 [No vale
19.£b2 ¥c5 20.¦xb7 ¦d2+] 19...£xb4 Calidad y peón de más. 20.¥e2 durante la partida pensé que
[20.f5 era la única manera de seguir luchando pero no hay compensación adecuada, por ejemplo
20...¥d7 21.¥d3 £d6 22.g3 c5 23.¥f4 £d4+ 24.¥e3 ¥a4!–+] 20...£a5! Controlando la importante
casilla f5. 21.£xh7 pierde fácilmente pero es difícil aconsejar a las blancas [21.¥f3 ¥g4!; 21.¦b1
¥f5] 21...£xa2 Con doble amenaza.La primera es Axc4... 22.¦c1 ¦xg2+! esta era la segunda
23.¢xg2 £xe2+ 24.¥f2 £g4+ 25.¢h1 [25.¢f1 ¥xc4+ 26.¦xc4 ¦d1+ 27.¥e1 £f3+ 28.¢g1 ¦xe1#;
25.¥g3 ¦d2+ 26.¢g1 £f3 27.£h8+ ¢d7] 25...¥xc4 26.¥g3 ¦d1+ [26...¦d1+ 27.¦xd1 £xd1+ 28.¢g2
£f1#] 0–1

(13) Noden,Nicolas (2196) - Connell,Blair (2260) [B01]

4NCL 0203 Div 4 West Bromwich (9.2), 24.05.2003
[Mark Hogarth]
1.e4 d5 2.exd5 £xd5 3.¤c3 £a5 4.d4 ¤f6 5.¤f3 c6 6.¥d2 ¥f5 7.¤e4 £c7 8.¤xf6+ gxf6 9.g3
e6 10.¥g2 ¥e4 11.0–0 ¤d7 12.¦e1 ¥xf3 13.£xf3 0–0–0 14.b4 ¥e7 15.a4 ¤b6 16.b5 ¦xd4
17.¥e3 ¦xa4 18.¦xa4? [18.bxc6!+-] 18...¤xa4 19.bxc6 b6 20.£g4 ¤c5 21.¥f4?! [21.£g7! ¦f8
22.¥f4 e5 23.¥h6±] 21...¥d6 22.¥xd6 £xd6 23.¦d1 f5 24.£h5 £e7 25.¦e1 £f6 26.£f3 £d4
27.¦d1 £g4 28.¢f1?! £xf3 29.¥xf3 ¦d8–+ 30.¦a1 a5 31.¢e2 ¢c7 32.h3 ¤e4 33.¢e3 ¢xc6
34.¦a4 ¢b5 35.¦a3 a4 36.¥xe4 fxe4 37.¢xe4 ¢b4 38.¦a2 b5 39.¢e3 ¦d1 [39...¢c3!] 40.¢e2 ¦h1
41.h4 ¢c3 42.¢e3 ¦e1+ 43.¢f3 ¦c1 0–1

(14) Noden,Nicolas (2196) - Connell,Blair (2260) [B01]

BCF-chT4 0203 fin (4NCL) Telford (9.2), 24.05.2003
1.e4 d5 2.exd5 £xd5 3.¤c3 £a5 4.d4 ¤f6 5.¤f3 c6 6.¥d2 ¥f5 7.¤e4 £c7 8.¤xf6+ gxf6 9.g3
e6 10.¥g2 ¥e4 11.0–0 ¤d7 12.¦e1 ¥xf3 13.£xf3 0–0–0 14.b4 ¥e7 15.a4 ¤b6 16.b5 ¦xd4
17.¥e3 ¦xa4 18.¦xa4? ¤xa4 19.bxc6 b6 20.£g4 ¤c5 21.¥f4?! ¥d6 22.¥xd6 £xd6 23.¦d1 f5
24.£h5 £e7 25.¦e1 £f6 26.£f3 £d4 27.¦d1 £g4 28.¢f1?! £xf3 29.¥xf3 ¦d8–+ 30.¦a1 a5
31.¢e2 ¢c7 32.h3 ¤e4 33.¢e3 ¢xc6 34.¦a4 ¢b5 35.¦a3 a4 36.¥xe4 fxe4 37.¢xe4 ¢b4 38.¦a2
b5 39.¢e3 ¦d1 40.¢e2 ¦h1 41.h4 ¢c3 42.¢e3 ¦e1+ 43.¢f3 ¦c1 0–1

(15) Glek,Igor V (2597) - Nakamura,Hikaru (2657) [B01]

Minneapolis HB Global op Minneapolis (3), 19.05.2005
1.e4 d5 2.exd5 £xd5 3.¤c3 £a5 4.¤f3 ¤f6 5.d4 c6 6.¥d2 ¥f5 7.¤e4 £c7 8.¤xf6+ gxf6 9.g3 e6 10.¥g2
¤d7 11.0–0 0–0–0 12.¦e1 ¥d6 13.c4 e5 14.¤h4 ¥g6 15.c5 ¥f8 16.b4 exd4 17.£b3 ¢b8 18.¥f4 ¤e5
19.b5 ¥xc5 20.bxc6 b6 21.¦ac1 ¥d6 22.¦ed1 d3 23.¤xg6 hxg6 24.¦c3 ¦he8 25.a4 g5 26.¥xe5 fxe5
27.¦cxd3 e4 28.¦d5 £xc6 29.¦xg5 ¥c7 30.¦gd5 ¦xd5 31.¦xd5 £e6 32.a5 0–1

(16) Glek,Igor V (2534) - Bauer,Christian (2625) [B01]

SUI-chT Switzerland (7.2), 06.09.2009
1.e4 d5 2.exd5 £xd5 3.¤c3 £a5 4.¤f3 ¤f6 5.d4 ¥f5 6.¥d2 c6 7.¤e4 £b6 8.¤xf6+ gxf6 9.¥c4 e6 10.0–
0 ¦g8 11.¦e1 ¤d7 12.b4 0–0–0 13.a4 ¥g4 14.a5 £c7 15.b5 ¥d6 16.¢h1 ¥f4 17.¥e3 cxb5 18.¥xb5 ¦g5
19.¥f1 ¥xe3 20.¦xe3 ¦xa5 21.£e1 ¦xa1 22.£xa1 ¢b8 23.¦c3 £d6 24.¤d2 ¤b6 25.¤b3 e5 26.£a5 exd4
27.¤xd4 £xd4 28.¦d3 £xf2 29.¦xd8+ ¢c7 30.£c5+ £xc5 0–1

(17) Leko,Peter (2732) - Caruana,Fabiano (2786) [B01]

Tashkent FIDE GP 2nd Tashkent (11), 04.12.2012
[Marin,M]
1.e4 d5 2.exd5 £xd5 3.¤c3 £d6 4.d4 ¤f6 5.¤f3 g6 6.¤b5 It is just natural to question the
viability of such a provocative way of developing the queen. 6...£b6 7.¤a3!? A rare move, aiming
to maintain the flow of White's play. The knight is heading for e5, gaining more time on account of
the still exposed placement of the black queen.White's main continuations have a more concrete
and apparently threatening character. [7.c4 c6 We will follow 3 games of Motylev. In the first one
(chronologically) he had the white pieces and his impossibility of gaining an advantage might have
inspired him to take up the variation in his repertoire with Black. There is a common element in his
games with Black: the flexibility of thinking when it comes to the light-squared bishop. In one of the
games, the bishop travelled along the route ...¥c8-g4-c8-a6 and in the other one it had almost a
reverse trajectory! 8.¤c3 (8.c5 £d8 9.¤c3 ¥g7 10.¥c4 0–0 11.0–0 ¥g4 12.¥e3 b5 13.cxb6 axb6 14.h3
¥c8 15.a4 ¥a6 Bartel,M (2629)-Motylev,A (2677)/Warsaw 2012/ (0–1, 90)) 8...¥g7 (8...¥g4 9.¥e2
¥g7 10.0–0 0–0 11.h3 ¥xf3 12.¥xf3 ¤bd7 13.¦e1 ¦fe8 14.d5 ¦ad8 15.£b3 cxd5 16.cxd5 a6 17.¥g5
£xb3 18.axb3 h6 1/2 Motylev,A (2677)-Inarkiev,E (2676)/Poikovsky 2009/CBM 131/[Kritz]) 9.h3 0–0
10.¥d3 ¤bd7 11.0–0 ¦e8 12.¦e1 £c7 13.¥g5 ¤f8 14.£d2 ¤e6 15.¥e3 b6 16.¦ac1 ¥b7 17.c5 bxc5
18.dxc5 ¦ad8 19.£c2 ¤f4 20.¥xf4 £xf4 21.¥f1 ¥c8 22.£b3 ¥e6 Wan Yunguo (2441)-Motylev,A
(2683)/Hangzhou 2012/ (0–1, 80); 7.¥f4 initiates some interesting piece play. 7...¤d5 8.¥e5 (8.¥d2
is too modest to cause problems, but once again we can see Motylev's light-squared bishop at
work: 8...c6 9.¤a3 ¥g7 10.¤c4 £c7 11.¤ce5 0–0 12.¥c4 b5 13.¥b3 a5 14.a4 b4 15.0–0 ¥b7 16.£c1
¤d7 17.¥h6 ¤xe5 18.¥xd5 ¥xh6 19.£xh6 ¤g4 20.£h4 cxd5 21.£xg4 ¥c8 22.£g5 ¥f5 Boros,D (2485)-
Motylev,A (2705)/Rijeka 2010/CBM 136 (0–1, 42)) 8...f6 9.¥g3 a6 10.c4 axb5 11.cxd5 c6 (11...e6?!
12.¥d3 £a5+?! 13.¢f1 c6 14.£c2!± Petrosian,T (2613)-Kurajica,B (2535)/Plovdiv 2010/CBM 139 (1–0,
34). ^The last move prevents both possible captures on d5, for instance: 14...exd5? 15.¥xg6+ hxg6
16.£xg6+ ¢e7 17.¦e1+‚) 12.¥d3 £a5+! It is important to cause some lack of harmony in White's
position to compensate for the somehow chaotic character of Black's structure and his delay in
development. (12...cxd5 13.0–0 ¤c6 14.£b3 e6 15.¥xb5² Menkinovski,R (2349)-Milanovic,D
(2516)/Obrenovac 2011/CBM 145 Extra (0–1, 33)) 13.¢f1 cxd5÷ Jerez Perez,A (2416)-Alonso Rosell,A
(2502)/Sabadell 2011/CBM 144 Extra (1/2, 38)] 7...c6 [7...¥g7 8.¤c4 £c6 looks very provocative, to
put it mildly, but one of the greatest players ever (true, well after his best years) could not prove it
wrong: 9.¥e2 0–0 10.0–0 ¤bd7 11.¦e1 ¤d5 12.c3 h6 13.¥d2 £f6 14.¤ce5 ¤xe5 15.¤xe5 ¦d8 16.¥f3 c6
17.£c1 g5 18.¥h5² (1/2, 29) Karpov,A (2686)-Fernandez Garcia,J (2452)/Santurtzi 2003/CBM 093
ext] 8.¤c4 £d8 It is hard to tell which is the best square for the queen. On d8, it certainly stays out
of the range of the white dark-squared bishop. [8...£c7 is possible, though. 9.¤ce5 ¥g7 (As a
common pattern in this structure, I would offer the exchange of the active knight immediately after
it goes to e5; otherwise, ¤g5xf7 may cause some troubles. 9...¤bd7! ) 10.¥c4 (10.¤g5 0–0 11.¥c4 e6
12.0–0 would leave Black with the potential threat of a sacrifice on f7, with ample compensation for
White for just a negligible material deficit.) 10...¤d5 11.0–0 ¤d7 12.¤d3 0–0 13.¥b3 b5 14.¦e1 ¤7b6
15.c3 a5„ Solak,D (2567)-Milanovic,D (2499)/Vrnjacka Banja 2010/CBM 138 Extra (1/2, 29)] 9.g3!?
N The solid choice of a player who also has 1.d4 in his repertoire. White does not rush in, but hopes
that his space advantage will tell in the long run. [9.¤ce5 ¥g7 (9...¤bd7!) 10.¥c4 0–0 11.0–0 ¤bd7
12.c3 (12.¤xf7 ¦xf7 13.¥xf7+ ¢xf7 14.¤g5+ ¢g8 15.¤e6 £b6 16.£e2±) 12...¤xe5 13.¤xe5 ¤d5 14.¦e1
¥e6 Soltanici,R (2367)-Grigore,G (2505)/Baia Sprie 2011/CBM 142 Extra (1/2, 52); With normal play
for Black.] 9...¥e6 10.£e2 ¥g7 11.¥g2 0–0 Black, too, relies on long term elements, mainly his
lack of weaknesses and flexibility. [A more active approach would be 11...£d5 12.¤e3 (12.¤ce5
¤fd7; 12.¤cd2 0–0 13.0–0 £h5) 12...£a5+ 13.¥d2 £a6!?] 12.0–0 £c8 [After White's castling, 12...£d5
13.¤ce5² leaves queen without the possibility of gaining a tempo with check.] 13.¤g5 ¥d5 The idea
of distracting the enemy bishop to h6 is right, but concretely this move presents some risks.
[13...¥xc4 14.£xc4 e6 would not change much with respect to the game.] 14.¥h3 [And for the last
time, we see White refraining from the interesting sacrifice on f7, after 14.¤e5!? ] 14...¥xc4
15.£xc4 ¤bd7 16.£e2 £d8 This structure is typical of several openings: the Caro-Kann, the Pirc,
the Alekhine, or, as is the case now, the Scandinavian. Classical players would claim an advantage
for White, who has more space and the bishop pair, hypermodern thinkers would enjoy the prospect
of slowly building up counterplay against White's centre. 17.c4 This increases White's space
advantage, but also weakens the d4-square somewhat. 17...h6 18.¤f3 ¦e8 19.¦d1 e6 20.¥d2 a5
Since Black's hopes for counterplay are based on either ...e5 or ...c5, it is useful to ensure the
stability of one of his knights on c5 in advance. Besides, the last move prevents a massive white
queenside expansion. 21.¥c3 £c7 22.¦ac1 a4 But this is double edged already. In some cases, the
a4-pawn may become weak. For instance, in the endgame it would be within the range of the light-
squared bishop. 23.¥g2 ¦ad8 Both sides are fully mobilised, so what should come next? White is
not ready for any pawn break yet and should be mainly concerned to anticipate ...c6-c5 and ...e6-
e5, which cannot be stopped forever. 24.¦d3 ¤g4!? Abstractly a very nice plan: Black intends to
increase the pressure against d4 with ...¤h6-f5, as a complement to the ...c5-break. Concretely,
there seems to be a flaw, though. [The simple 24...c5!?„ looks quite OK.] 25.¦e1?! After this neutral
move, Black carries out his plan without problems. [Caruana probably intended to meet 25.h3 with
25...e5!? 26.dxe5 ¤gxe5 27.¤xe5 ¤xe5 If Black manages to transfer his knight to c5 and exchange
the dark-squared bishops, he will get a dream ending, especially in the presence of queens. Still,
there are some concrete problems: 28.¦e3 ¦e6 29.¦e1 (29.f4? ¤d3!µ) 29...¦de8 30.£d1² Suddenly,
there are some problems with the a4-pawn, while the pin along the e-file is also a bit annoying.]
25...h5 26.h3 ¤h6 27.¥d2 c5„ [27...¤f5!? 28.¥g5 ¥f6 29.¥xf6 ¤xf6=] 28.¥g5 ¦c8 29.¥f4 [29.d5
¤f5„] 29...£a5 30.dxc5 ¤xc5 31.£d2 [31.¦dd1 £b4] 31...£xd2 [31...£a7!? 32.¦a3 (32.¦d6? ¤f5–+)
32...¦ed8 33.£e2 £b6„] 32.¦xd2 ¦ed8 33.¦ed1 ¦xd2 34.¦xd2 ¤e4 35.¦c2 ¤c5 36.¦d2 ¤e4 37.¦d7
¤c5 38.¦d1 f6?! Quite a mysterious weakening move, allowing White to take over the initiative.
[38...¤f5 39.g4 hxg4 40.hxg4 ¤e7 41.¥d6 ¥f8=] 39.¥e3 ¤f5 40.¥xc5 ¦xc5 41.¦d8+ ¢h7 42.¥f1
¦c7 43.¦a8² White wins a pawn, but Black will somehow manage to generate enough counterplay to
hold a draw. 43...e5 44.¦xa4 e4 45.¤d2 ¤d6 46.¦a5 f5 47.¦d5 ¤c8 48.b4 ¥c3 49.a3 ¤e7 50.¦d6
¥b2 51.¤b1 ¤c6 52.c5 ¦e7 53.¢g2 h4 54.b5 ¤d4 55.¤d2 hxg3 56.¢xg3 ¥c3 57.¤b1 ¥b2
58.¤d2 ¥c3 59.¤b1 ¥b2 60.¤d2 ½–½

(18) Dominguez Perez,Leinier (2712) - Ivanchuk,Vassily (2749) [B01]

Corus Wijk aan Zee (12), 30.01.2010
[Marin,M]
1.e4 d5 2.exd5 £xd5 3.¤c3 £d6 4.d4 ¤f6 5.¤f3 c6 6.¤e5 ¤bd7 7.¤c4 £c7 8.d5!? Almost a
novelty. White hopes to obtain an advance in development by opening the centre. Strategically, the
exchange of the central pawn for the c6-pawn is a slight concession, though. 8...g6N Maintaining
the tension. [Black equalized gradually after: 8...cxd5 9.¤xd5 ¤xd5 10.£xd5 ¤f6 11.£e5 £xe5+
12.¤xe5 a6 13.¥e3 ¤g4 Bergerhoff,R-Packroff,H/Germany 1996/Corr 2004 (1/2, 24)] 9.£d4 ¥g7
10.¥f4 £d8 11.dxc6 bxc6 12.0–0–0 0–0÷ The position is characteristic rather for the Sicilian
Dragon. WHite is better developed, but will have to repeatedly move with his queen in the next
phase of the game in order to achieve the desired coordination. 13.£d2 ¥b7 14.¥h6 £c7 15.¥xg7
¢xg7 16.£e3 ¤b6 17.£e5 ¦ac8 18.¦e1 ¦fe8 19.f3 £xe5 20.¦xe5 ¤bd5 21.¤d1 ¦c7 22.¤a5 ¥c8
23.a3 h5 24.g3 ¥f5 25.c4 ¤b6 26.¤c3 ¤bd7 27.¦e3 e5 28.¥g2 ¤d5 29.cxd5 cxd5 30.¢d1
¦ec8 31.¦ee1 d4 32.¤e4 ¦c1+ 33.¢e2 ¦1c2+ 34.¢f1 ¦xb2 35.¦e2 ¦cc2 36.¦xc2 ¦xc2 37.¤b3
¥xe4 38.fxe4 ¤b6 39.¥f3 d3 40.¥d1 ¦a2 41.¤c5 ¦xa3 42.¢e1 ¤c4 43.¦f1 ¦c3 44.¤a4 d2+
45.¢f2 ¦a3 46.¤c5 ¤e3 47.¦g1 ¦c3 48.¤a4 ¤xd1+ 49.¦xd1 ¦c4 50.¤b2 ¦xe4 51.¦xd2 h4 52.¤d3
hxg3+ 53.hxg3 ¦d4 54.¢e3 ¦g4 55.¢f3 ¦d4 56.¢e3 ½–½

(19) Cheparinov,Ivan (2618) - Tiviakov,Sergei (2700) [B01]

Pamplona 15th Pamplona (2), 24.12.2005
[Tiviakov]
1.e4 d5 2.exd5 £xd5 3.¤c3 £d6 4.d4 ¤f6 5.¤f3 a6 6.a3!? ¤bd7 7.¥d3N [7.g3!? e6 (7...b5!?;
7...¤b6!?) 8.¥g2 (8.¥f4 £b6=) 8...c5 (8...¥e7 9.0–0 0–0 10.¦e1²; 8...£b6!? 9.0–0 ¥d6) 9.0–0 (9.¥f4
£b6 10.0–0!?ƒ) 9...cxd4 10.¤xd4 ¥e7 11.¥e3 (11.¥f4²) 11...0–0 12.£e2² (12.b4?! 12...£c7=
(12...¤b6?! 13.¤c6! (13.£e2 £c7= 14.¤a2 ¥d7 15.¦fd1 ¦ac8 16.¥f4 £c4 17.£xc4 ¤xc4 18.¥xb7 e5
19.¥xa6 exf4 20.¥xc8 ¦xc8 21.¤c1 ¤d5 22.¤db3 ¤db6 23.¤d3 ¥f6 24.¦a2 ¤a4 25.¤xf4 ¤c3 26.¦xd7
¤xa2 27.¦a7 ¥b2 28.¤d5 ¢f8 29.¤c5 g6 30.a4 ¥d4 31.¤d7+ ¢g7 32.¦b7 ¤d6 33.¦b8 ¦xc2 34.¤e3 ¥xe3
35.fxe3 ¦b2 36.b5 ¤c3 37.¦a8 ¦a2 38.¦a6 ¤c4 39.b6 ¤xe3 40.b7 ¦g2+
) 13...bxc6 14.£xd6 ¥xd6 15.¥xb6² ) ) ] 7...g6 [7...e6] 8.0–0 ¥g7 9.¦e1 [9.£e2] 9...0–0 10.£e2
e6?! [¹10...¦e8] 11.b4!? [11.¤e4 ¤xe4 (11...£e7 12.¥g5² (12.¥f4²) ) 12.£xe4 c5 13.c3 cxd4
14.cxd4ƒ] 11...b5! [11...b6 12.¤e4 ¤xe4 (12...£c6 13.c4) 13.£xe4²] 12.a4 [12.¤e4 ¤xe4 13.¥xe4
(13.£xe4 ¤b6÷ (13...¦b8!?) ) 13...¦b8 ] 12...bxa4™ [12...£xb4 13.axb5!! (13.¥d2 bxa4
14.¤b5 £e7 15.¤xc7 (15.¦xa4? ¤b6 16.¥b4 £d8 17.¥xf8 ¥xf8 18.¤c3 ¤xa4 19.¤xa4 ¥b7–+) 15...¦a7
16.¤xa6 ¥xa6 17.¥xa6 a3²) 13...¥b7 (13...£xc3 14.¥d2 £b2 15.£f1± ) 14.¥d2 ¥xf3 (14...axb5
15.¤xb5 ¥xf3 (15...£e7 16.¤xc7 ¦xa1+-) 16.gxf3 £e7 17.¦xa8 ¦xa8 18.¤xc7±) 15.£xf3 £xd4
16.bxa6± ; 12...¥b7 13.axb5 ¥xf3 (13...£xb4 ; 13...axb5 14.¤xb5+-) 14.£xf3 £xd4
15.¥d2! ¤e5 16.¦xe5 £xe5 17.bxa6± …17...¤d5 18.¦e1!] 13.¥a3 [¹13.¤xa4 ¥b7 14.c3 ¥xf3
(14...¤d5!?) 15.£xf3 e5 16.¥e3 (16.¤c5 exd4 17.¥f4 £d5! 18.¤xd7 (18.£xd5 ¤xd5 19.¤xd7 ¤xf4=)
18...£xd7 19.c4© (19.¥e5 ¤d5!) ) 16...¤d5 (16...¦fe8!?; 16...¦ae8!?) 17.¥e4 c6²] 13...£c6 14.¤e4
[14.£d2!?© ; 14.¥b2 ¤b6÷] 14...¦d8 15.b5 [15.c4©; 15.¤xf6+ ¤xf6 16.b5 (16.¤e5©) 16...axb5
] 15...axb5 16.¥e7? [¹16.¤xf6+ ¤xf6 17.¥xb5 £b7 (17...£c3 18.¥e7©) 18.¤e5©] 16...¥a6!
17.¥xd8 [17.¤xf6+ ¤xf6 18.¤e5 (18.¥xd8 ¦xd8 ) 18...£e8 (18...£d5³) 19.¥xd8 ¦xd8³]
17...¦xd8 18.¤xf6+ [18.¤e5 ¤xe5 19.¤xf6+ ¥xf6 20.dxe5 ¥e7µ] 18...¤xf6 19.¦eb1 [19.¤e5 £e8³
(19...£d5³; 19...£b6³) ] 19...¤d5! [19...¦d5³] 20.¥xb5™ ¤c3 21.¥xc6 ¥xe2 22.¦b7 [22.¦b4 ¥xf3
23.¥xf3 ¥xd4 24.¦bxa4 ¤xa4 25.¦xa4µ ] 22...¥xf3 23.¥xf3 ¥xd4 24.¦a3 ¥e5 [¹24...e5 25.¢f1™
e4 26.¥e2 ¥e5 27.¢e1µ (27.f4!?) ] 25.¢f1™ ¦d2 [25...c5!?; 25...¢g7!?] 26.¦b2™ c5 [¹26...¦d6 27.¦b4
(27.¢e1 ¦b6 28.¦xb6 cxb6 29.¥c6 b5µ; 27.¦b8+ ¢g7 28.¢e1 ¦b6 29.¦b7µ) 27...¦b6 28.¦axa4 (28.¦xb6
cxb6 29.¥c6 b5 30.¦xc3 ¥xc3 31.¥xb5 a3 32.¥c4µ) 28...¤xa4 29.¦xa4µ] 27.¢e1 ¦d4? [¹27...¦d8µ]
28.¦b7! ¦b4 29.¥c6!= h5 30.h3 h4 31.¦xb4 [31.¦a1!?÷] 31...cxb4 32.¦xa4 ¤xa4 33.¥xa4 ½–
½

(20) Topalov,Veselin (2772) - Nisipeanu,Liviu Dieter (2693) [B01]

Sofia MTel Masters 3rd Sofia (1), 10.05.2007
[Nisipeanu,L]
The first round in such a strong tournament as the MTel Masters, has a special signifiance for any
chessplayer, especially when you have to play the main favourite for the competition. 1.e4 d5 This
was the surprise I have prepared for Vesselin. I was influenced by Tiviakov's games in Wijk aan Zee
2006 for this choice of opening. 2.exd5 £xd5 3.¤c3 £d6 4.g3!? [Surprisingly shy. I was expecting
4.d4 ¤f6 5.¤f3 c6 6.¤e5 which is the favourite choice of strong players when they play against this
opening.] 4...¤f6 5.¥g2 c6 Probably it was better to play g6 immediately and choose later if a
pawn or a knight belongs on c6 6.d4 g6 [6...¥f5 7.¤ge2 e6 8.0–0 ¥e7 9.h3 h5!? was the choice of
my 'Apa Nova Bucharest' teammate Ardelean Catalin in his game against Peptan Corina Bucharest
2006. This option looks more in line with the c6 move than the choice I've made in the game.]
7.¥f4 £b4 [I didn't like the look of 7...£d8 8.£d2 ¥g7 9.0–0–0 0–0 10.¥h6ƒ] 8.¤ge2 ¥g7 9.£c1 A
tricky move, because now, with the b2-pawn defended, sometimes ¥c7 becomes a threat. 9...0–0
10.0–0 ¥g4 The prospects for this bishop weren't too great anyway, so I decided to get rid of it
immediately. 11.a3 £a5 12.h3 ¥xe2 13.¤xe2 ¤bd7 14.c4 [After the game Veselin thought that
14.b4 £a6 15.¦e1 was more promising, but after 15...£c4!? (15...¤b6 16.¥f1 ¤c4 17.¤c3²) 16.c3 a5
17.¦b1 axb4 18.¦xb4 £a6 19.c4 ¤h5 20.¥e3 e5 the position is unclear.] 14...e5 15.b4 £c7 16.dxe5
¤xe5 17.£c2² White has a slight edge because of the bishop pair, but Black's position is very solid.
17...a5! The right moment for this move, because now White cannot play b5. 18.¦ae1 axb4
19.axb4 ¦fe8 20.c5 [The more direct 20.¤d4 ¦ad8 21.¦xe5 ¦xe5 22.¤f3 ¤h5 23.¤xe5 ¥xe5 24.¥g5
¥f6= would have only helped Black.] 20...¤d5 21.¥d2 ¤d7! It looks strange to retreat a knight
from the centre, but this knight belongs on e6. 22.£c4! Of course, Veselin does not give me the
chance to execute ¤f8-e6. [22.¤f4 ¤xf4 23.¥xf4 ¥e5 24.¥h6 ¤f8² was another possiblity, but in my
opinion White has more chances of success if he keeps the knights on the board.] 22...¤7f6
[22...b5?! is what the computer suggests, but humans know that pawns don't move backwards.]
23.g4!? I felt happy when I saw this move, because in the long run the f4 square could become
weak. On the other hand White is gaining space on the kingside and hopes to realize f4-f5 one day.
[23.¤c3 £d7 24.¤xd5 ¤xd5 25.b5 h5 is close to equality.] 23...h5! This move is aimed at weakening
White's pawns on the kingside. 24.¤g3 [I expected 24.g5 ¤h7 25.¤g3 ¤f8 26.¤e4 ¦ed8 27.¤d6 ¦xd6
28.cxd6 £xd6 when Black appears to have decent compensation for the exchange.] 24...hxg4
25.hxg4 £d7 26.g5 ¦xe1 27.¦xe1 ¤e8!= After this move, which prepares ¤e8-c7, I thought that
Black has no problems; a fresh look at it has not changed my evaluation. 28.¥f3 [After 28.¤e4 ¥e5
29.£b3 ¤ec7 30.¥h3 £d8 31.¥f1 ¤e6³ the weakness of the f4 square begins to tell.] 28...¤ec7
29.¥g4 £d8 30.¢g2 ¤b5 31.¦d1 ¦a1!? [31...¦a3 32.¤e4 ¥e5 33.¦e1=] 32.¦xa1 ¥xa1 33.¥f3 ¥e5
34.¤e2 [34.¥xd5 was safer, but Veselin was trying to take advantage of my slight timetrouble.]
34...¤dc7 35.¥e3 ¤e6 36.¥g4 ¤bc7 37.£e4 [After 37.f4 ¤d5 (37...¥g7!?) 38.¢f2 ¤xe3 39.¢xe3
¤xf4 40.¤xf4 £xg5 41.£e4 ¢g7 42.¢f3 £f6 is a draw.] 37...¥g7 38.f4 £d1 39.¢f2 ¥c3! Now it is
clear that White should start thinking about a draw, but my opponent was still playing very quickly
and was obviosly upset about the course that the game had taken. 40.b5?! [40.¤xc3 £xg4 41.£e5
£h4+ 42.¢f3 was probably good enough for a draw.] 40...£e1+ It is almost impossible to refrain
from such a move with the seconds ticking away. [Also possible was 40...¤xb5 41.f5 (41.¥xe6 £e1+
42.¢g2 £xe2+ 43.¢g1 ¢f8!–+) 41...gxf5 42.£xf5 £h1 43.¤xc3 ¤xc3 44.¥f3 £h2+³] 41.¢g2 ¤d5
42.bxc6 bxc6 43.£d3? [After the correct 43.¥c1 ¥d2 44.¥xd2 £xd2 45.¥xe6 ¤xf4+ 46.£xf4 £xe2+
47.¢g3 £xe6³ it is unlikely that Black can win this ending.] 43...¥d4! Now it is all over. 44.¥xe6
¤xe3+ 45.¢h2 £f2+ 46.¢h3 £f3+ I had seen this line long before, and since it wins a piece, I
didn't bother to look for something else. [Simpler was 46...£g2+ 47.¢h4 £h2+ 48.¥h3 £f2+ 49.¤g3
£xf4+] 47.¤g3 £g2+ 0–1

(21) Peón Rey - Defensa Escandinava [B01]

Consejos generales 27.05.2019
[José Carlos Celaya]
1.e4 d5 Esta jugada define la Defensa Escandinava. 2.exd5 £xd5 3.¤c3 £a5 Es éste un pequeño
trabajo sobre la Defensa Escandinava. Recomendaciones para el negro: juegue tan pronto como
pueda ... c6, para darle a la £ una casilla de retirada; trate de enrocar largo aprovechando que ya
sacó la £; los peones doblados f7-f6, si bien están doblados, le dan una columna a la torre y
dominan casillas centrales; no pasee con la dama, saque sus piezas. El esquema para sacar las
piezas es: 1) realice ante todo el avance ... c6 para que la dama retorne a su campo; 2) el caballo
rey con ... ¤f6; 3) el alfil dama, el de casillas blancas sale con ... ¥f5 ... ¥g4; 4) el caballo de dama
sale con ... ¤bd7; 5) realice el enroque largo; 6) luego saque las piezas del flanco rey, alfil rey, el de
casillas negras sale con ... ¥e7 o bien ... ¥b4; 6) traiga la ¦h8 con ¦e8; no se haga muchos problemas
con los peones doblados f7 y f6 ya que le dan una columna; con peones doblados en el flanco rey
¡ nunca haga el enroque corto, siempre el largo!; 9) realice el golpe de peón ... c5 para equilibrar en
el centro. Si sigue esta receta no tendrá problemas contra 1 e4 de las blancas. Para la próxima va la
receta contra 1 d4. Por ahora estudie las partidas modelo y retenga el plan de desarrollo: primero
saque las piezas del flanco dama y enroque largo, recién entonces juegue ... e6, saque las piezas
del flanco rey y luego procure realizar el golpe central ... c5. ¡No olvide realizar enseguida la
jugada ... c6 para que la dama no tenga problemas para volver a su territorio. [3...£d6; 3...£d8]
4.d4 ¤f6 5.¤f3 c6! 6.¥c4 ¥g4 [6...¥f5 7.¥d2 e6 8.¤e4 £c7 9.¤xf6+ gxf6 10.£e2 ¤d7 11.0–0–0 0–0–
0 12.¤h4 ¥g6 13.c3 ¤b6 14.¥b3 c5 15.dxc5 ¥xc5 16.¤xg6 hxg6 17.h4 ¤d7 18.g3² £b6 19.¦hf1 ¤e5
20.¥f4 ¦xd1+ 21.¥xd1 ¦d8 22.¥c2 ¤c6 23.g4 ¤e7 24.h5 ¤d5 25.¥d2 g5 26.h6 £d6 27.h7 ¤f4 28.¥xf4
£xf4+ 29.¢b1 ¦h8 30.¦d1 a6 31.b4 ¥f8 32.¦d4 £e5 33.£c4+ £c7 34.£d3 £b6 35.¦c4+ ¢b8 36.£d7 £xf2
37.¦c8+ ¢a7 38.£d8 1–0 Golod,V (2514)-Bitansky,I (2363)/Tel Aviv 82/89 2001] 7.h3 ¥h5 8.g4 ¥g6
9.¥d2 e6 10.£e2 ¥b4 11.¤e5 ¤bd7 12.0–0–0 0–0–0 13.h4 ¤xe5 14.dxe5 ¦xd2 15.£xd2 ¥xc3
16.bxc3 £a3+ 17.¢b1 ¤e4–+ Las negras tienen clara ventaja, a pesar de tener caballo por torre,
por la deficiente protección de peones del rey blanco. 18.£d7+ ¢b8 19.¥b3 ¤xc3+ 20.¢a1 ¤xd1
21.¦xd1 h5 22.¦b1 £a5 23.¥d5 £c3+ 24.¦b2 £e1+ 25.¦b1 £xe5+ 26.¦b2 £c7 27.£xc6 0–1
Roth,P (2252)-Rogers,I (2618)/Baden (open) 1999 Line