Shakmaty Bereolos - The Official Chess Site of Peter Bereolos


5/14/05 - Bukic - Brinck-Claussen, Krakow 1964

I had enjoyed watching the video lectures on Chess FM, but sadly they seem to have removed the old archives. I had some additional thoughts on one of the games presented by IM Mark Diesen. This game was in a sharp line of the Petrosian Variation of the Kings Indian between Enver Bukic and Bjorn Brink-Claussen. 1. d4 Nf6 2. c4 g6 3. Nc3 Bg7 4. e4 d6 5. Nf3 O-O 6. Be2 e5 7. d5 Nbd7 8. Bg5 h6 9. Bh4 g5 10. Bg3 Nh5 In the 1994 Indiana Masters Invitational, Jim Mills tried 10... Nxe4 11. Nxe4 f5 against me. But after 12. Nfd2 fxe4 13. Nxe4 the grip on the e4 square gave me an advantage that he was not able to overcome. 11. h4 Nf4 This seems to be the least popular of Black's choices, the main move being 11...g4 as in the game Kramnik-Kasparov, Linares 1994 12. hxg5 hxg5 13. Qc2 In the early days of this variation, White tried several other moves, such as 13. Bf1; 13. Kf1; and 13. Kd2 all of which were well met by 13... f5 which the text move is designed to prevent, but does it really?

13... Nxg2+ 13... f5!? 14. exf5 This is the move that is generally quoted as refuting f5 based on the line 14... Nc5 15. Bxf4 Bxf5 16. Bxg5 and Brinck-Claussen won from the White side of this position in the 1966 Havana Olympiad. Instead, perhaps 15... exf4!? is playable, for example, 16. f6 Qxf6 17. Qh7+ Kf7 18. Qh5+ Ke7 19. Nxg5 Bf5 20. Nh3 Rh8 21. Qf3 Rh4 and Black is doing very well. It is interesting to note that instead of 14. exf5, Mecking tried 14. Bxf4 exf4 15. O-O-O a couple of times 15... Nc5 16. Rh5 fxe4 (16... g4 17. Ng5 led to a Mecking victory over Najdorf at Palma de Majorca 1969) 17. Nxg5 Bf5 18. Ne6 Nxe6 19. dxe6 Bxc3 20. Qxc3 Qf6 21. Qa5 b6 22. Qd5 Rae8 23. Rdh1 Kg7 24. Bg4 Bg6 25. R5h3 Re7 26. a3 a5 27. Kb1 Qe5 1/2-1/2, Mecking-R. Byrne, Sousse 1967 14. Kf1 Diesen suggests 14. Kd2 as better, based on the line 14... g4 15. Rag1 gxf3 16. Bxf3 Qg5+ 17. Kd1? Nf4? 18. Bh4 Qh6 19. Be7 which was also given by Petrosian, but this is simply refuted by 17...Qxg3. Better is 17. Ke2, but this still only led to a draw after 17...Nf4+ 18. Bxf4 Qxf4 19. Rg4 Qf6 20. Qc1 (perhaps 20. Rhg1!?) 20... Nc5 21. Rg2 Nd3 22. Rxg7+ Kxg7 23. Rg1+ Kh7 24. Rh1+ Kg7 25. Rg1+ Kh7 1/2-1/2, Sbarra-Lapiccirella Mattia Colonia Tovar 1999. Black can also deviate earlier with 16... Nf4 17. Bxf4 exf4 18. e5, when Petrosian concluded that White has an attack, but Nunn suggests that White has no more than a draw after 18... f5 19. exf6 (19. Rxg7+ Kxg7 20. Rg1+ is a perpetual) 19... Nxf6 20. Rxg7+. However, 20. Qg6 looks like a way to keep the attack going 20... Qe7 21. Qh6 or 20...Rf7 21. Rh8+ both seem to be advantageous to White, so Black may not be totally in the clear here. 14... Nf4 15. Bxf4 gxf4 16. Kg2 f5 This move seems to be a bit too loosening, and may be the decisive error. Right now the Qc2 and Nc3 are not participating in the attack and the text also exposes e6 to a knight invasion with Ng5-e6. Instead, Petrosian's suggested 16... Bf6 17. Rag1 Re8 looks pretty solid. White has compensation for his pawn, but I don't think much more. The Bf6 prevents Nh4, so effectively White is only attacking with his two rooks, while the Black king should find a safe home on e7, when it looks like he has time to start unwinding his position. 18. Kf1+ Kf8 19. Rg2 (19. b4 Ke7 20. Ne1 Rg8) 19... Ke7 20. Rhg1 and Black has many plans to chose from, while it is not clear how White makes any further progress.] 17. Rag1 Nc5 18. Kf1 Nxe4 after 18...fxe4 19. b4 Nd3 20. Nxe4 Nxb4 White crashes through with 21. Nf6+ Qxf6 22. Qh7+ Kf7 23. Rxg7+ 19. Nxe4 fxe4 20. Ng5 f3 21. Bxf3 Rf5 22. Ne6 Bxe6 23. Bxe4 Rg5 24. dxe6 c6 25. Bh7+ Kf8 26. Qd3 e4 27. Qxe4 Be5 28. f4 d5 29. cxd5 cxd5 30. Qb4+ [1:0]


Archives
www.000webhost.com