MICHIGAN CHESS ASSOCIATION
Analysis by Vasik Rajlich
Rajlich,V.-Duong,D.N.(2340 CFC) (Toronto International
Open, R08)
King's Gambit: King's Knight (Fischer) [C34/06
(3rd ed.)]
1998.05.18. CAN Toronto [TC:40/120; G/60]
1.e4 e5 2.f4 exf4 3.Nf3 d6 4.d4
g5 5.h4 g4 6.Ng1 Bh6 7.Nc3 f5
The immediate 6...f5 (to which 6...Bh6 7.Nc3 f5
tranposes) is a new move in the Fisher defense. It is hardly surprising
that this move is only a recent discovery, since it more natural for black
to develop and attempt to keep the cover around his king semi-intact, but
so far it has held up through a fair amount of analysis. My current opinion
is that it's black's best and that it leaves white trying to equalize in
each of the main variations:
A) 7.Nc3 Nf6 8.Bxf4
fxe4 / 7.Bxf4 Nf6 8.Nc3 fxe4
B) 7.Qe2 Bh6
C) 7.Qe2 Qe7 8.Nc3
Nf6
There are, however, several lines in the above
variations which are still under investigation, so the last word is not
yet out.
Sonny has put together a thorough set of notes
on the consequences of 6...f5. Rather than deal with the mass of variations,
I want to give my impressions of this position based on the three games
in my last match with Sonny in which I played the white side. It may seem
futile to attempt to talk about themes and general principles in the King's
Gambit, but in fact it is particularly beneficial to do so since the variations
are so complex.
The first game of the match began 1.e4 e5 2.f4
exf4 3. Nf3 d6 4.d4 g5 5.h4 g4 6.Ng1 f5 7.Nc3 Nf6 8.Qe2? Bh6! (8...Qe7
would be quite fine for black. In fact, one of two very satisfactory replies
to 7.Qe2 is 7...Qe7 8.Nc3 Nf6 when both 9.e5 and 9.Bxf4 seem to be good
for black. [The other satisfactory response to 7.Qe2 is 7...Bh6 8.exf5+
{8.Nc3 Nf6 would tranpose to 7.Nc3 Nf6 8.Qe2 Bh6} 8...Kf7 9.Qxg4 Nf6 10.
Qh3 Rg8.] 8...Bh6, however, is much stronger and leaves white practically
lost.) 9.exf5+ Kf7 10.Qb5 (Predictably, 10.Qf2 is also good for black.)
10...Re8+ 11.Kd1 Nc6 12.Bd3 Kg7 13.Nge2 (13.Nce2 Ne4 would be quite good
for black.) and now 13...f3 would have been clearly winning since 14.gxf3
Bxc1 15.Kxc1 gxf3 16.Rg1+ Kh8 17.Nf4/g3 Nxd4 18.Qc4 would leave white with
insufficient compensation for the material.
What is notable about this variation is that three
times black played moves which seriously compromised the safety of his
king (ie. 6...f5, 8...Bh6, and 13...f3) in positions in which the safety
of his king could conceivably be a major issue, and all three times this
provocation was correct. Black's king is safer that it appears, and white's
inability to take advantage of it is surprising.(In fact, it wasn't until
after several post-game analyses and blitz games that I finally conceded
that 8...Bh6 left black better.) Of more importance than the exposure of
black's king seems to be the dismantling of white's center and the holding
together of black's kingside pawns, which 6...f5, 8...Bh6 and 13...f3 all
help accomplish.
The third game began 1.e4 e5 2.f4 exf4 3.Nf3 d6
4.d4 g5 5.h4 g4 6.Ng1 f5 7.Nc3 Nf6 8.Bxf4 fxe4 9.Qd2 d5 10.0-0-0 c6 11.
Nge2 Bd6 (Fritz played 11...Be6 against me the only other time that I have
reached this position.) 12.Be5? (It is not clear whether white has compensation
for his material in this position. Most logical is 12.Re1, since it could
be argued that white needs something major to compensate for black's healthy
extra pawn, and that only the sacrifice of a piece in the center could
lead to such compensation. At present, however, white lacks a convincing
follow-up to 12.Re1. Seemingly too passive but perhaps best is 12.Be2,
with the idea of leaving the center alone and developing with Rdf1, Nc3-d1-e3,
perhaps h4-h5 and Rh4, ... Black's position is difficult to mobilize even
if he can ward off the immediate threats, and even endgames aren't hopeless
for white. This is one of those positions which needs further investigation.
What is clear is that 12.Be5 is bad.) 12...Qe7 13.Ng3? (This is the only
consistent continuation but it loses.) 13...Bxe5 14.dxe5 Qxe5 15.Ncxe4
Nxe4 16.Nxe4 0-0? (16...dxe4 would leave white lost.) 17.Ng5 (Fortunately
for white black cannot accept this piece sacrifice since without it white
would stand much worse.) 17...h6 18.Re1 Qf4 (Necessary, since 18...Qf6
19. Bd3 hxg5 20.hxg5 Qf4 would lose to 21.Bh7+ Kg7 22.Re7+ or 21.Qxf4 Rxf4
22.Re8+ Rf8 23.Rh8+.) 19.Qxf4 Rxf4 20.Ne6 Bxe6 21.Rxe6 and black really
isn't any worse.
What is notable about this game is that white
has really been both "brilliant" and lucky. First, he had initiated a dazzling
pair of sacrifices with 12.Be5. Next, he had dodged the winning shot 16.
..dxe4. Finally, he had calculated that he could get away with playing
17.Ng5, since other moves would leave black clearly better. What does white
have at the end of all of this? An equal endgame. There is a scene in some
movie where a swordsman goes through some elaborate pre-fight ritual of
swinging his sword all over the place and whooping and jumping and all
of that and then the other guy who was just standing there watching the
the whole time pulls out a gun and shoots him, and this is what this variation
seems like. Black's position is solid, and he can simply stand there and
rebuke whatever creative stuff white dreams up. Black may not stand better
if white plays correctly, but he has the easier task.
The fifth game followed the third until Sonny
deviated with 16...dxe4. This probably doesn't deserve any commentary but
it illustrates a point which is perhaps more significant than all of the
others: in this opening, preparation is particularly important. In my experience,
this opening attracts more theoreticians than tacticians - Michigan's leading
King's Gambiteer is Kevin Noren, and Illinois' is Albert Chow - and probably
rightfully so.
In the featured game, we have transposed to
a position which would also arise after 6...f5 7.Nc3 Bh6. My current assessment
is that this position favors white, but nevertheless I now prefer ruling
this possibility out by responding to 6...f5 with the immediate 7.Bxf4
when black should have nothing better than 7...Nf6, transposing to the
6... f5 7.Nc3 Nf6 8.Bxf4 line which is still under investigation. It does
appear to be acceptable, however, to respond to 6...Bh6 with 7.Nc3, giving
black a second chance to play ...f5 under less favorable circumstances.
8.Bd3!
This leads to a slight edge for white.Inferior
would have been:
A) 8.Qd3 (-/+) fxe4
and now:
A1) 9.Qxe4+ (-/+)
Qe7
A11) 10.Bd3 (-/+)
Bf5 11.Qxe7 Nxe7 -/+
A12) 10.Qxe7+ (-/+)
Nxe7 11.Bd3 (Else 11...Nf5, with the idea of forcing white to defend d4
and playing ..Ne3, is too strong: 11.Nge2 Nf5 12.Nb5 [12.g3 f3 -+] Kd8
13.c3 [13.Bxf4 {13.Nxf4 a6} Bxf4 14.Nxf4 a6 -+] Ne3 -+) 11...Bf5 12.Nge2
Bxd3 13.cxd3 Nc6 (13...Nf5 14.Nb5 Kd8 15.0-0 Ne3 16.Bxe3 fxe3 17.Rf7 isn't
so clear.) 14.0-0 Rf8 15.g3 Nf5 16.d5 Ne5 and black continues to hold his
extra material.
A13) 10.Nge2 (-/+)
Qxe4 11.Nxe4 Bf5 -/+
A2) 9.Nxe4 (=/+)
Nf6
A21) 10.g3 Qe7 -+
A22) 10.Nxf6 (-/+)
Qxf6 11.Qe4+ Kf7 12.Nge2 (12.Bc4+ Be6! [12...Kg7 13.Nge2 Nc6 14.Bxf4 Bxf4
15.0-0 +-] 13.Qxb7 [13.d5 Bf5 -+; 13.Bxe6 Qxe6 -+] 13...Bxc4 14.Qxa8 Re8+
-+) Nc6 13.Bxf4 Bxf4 14. Nxf4 Qxd4 and black is winning
A23) 10.Nge2 (=/-)
10...0-0 11.g3 (11.Bxf4 Bxf4 12.Nxf4 Nxe4 13.Qxe4 Re8 -+; 11.Bd2 Nc6 12.0-0-0
is also possible but doesn't offer any advantages over 11.g3) Nc6 12.Bxf4
Bxf4 13.gxf4 and black must be at least a bit better.
A24) 10.Ng5 (-/+)
10...Qe7+ 11.Nge2 Nd5 -/+
B) 8.Nge2 f3 9.gxf3
gxf3 10.Ng1 (10.Ng3 fxe4 11.Ncxe4 Bg4 -+) 10...fxe4 11.Nxe4 Qe7 12.Qxf3
Bxc1 13.Rxc1 d5 -+
8...fxe4 9.Bxe4?
Incredibly enough, this seems to just lose.Good
enough for an edge was 9.Nxe4 and now:
A) 9...Nf6 (+/=)
10.Ng5 (10.Nge2 Nxe4 11.Bxe4 Qe7 12.Bd3 0-0 and 10.Nxf6 Qxf6 11.Qe2+ Kf7
both run into immediate trouble.) and white is doing fine as he will win
black's f-pawn with the better game: 10...Nd5 11.Nxh7, or 10...Qe7+ 11.Qe2
(+/=)
B) 9...Qe7 (+/=)
and now:
B1) 10.Nge2 (=/-)
10...Nf6 11.Ng5 (Again, 11.Nxf6 Qxf6 and black is holding his pawns together
nicely.) 11...Nc6 12.c3 Nd5 and black still seems to have an edge
B2) 10.Qe2! (+/=)
Nc6 11.c3 Bd7 12.Ng5 and white will recover the f-pawn with the better
game
Why is 8.Bd3 correct? Why is 9.Nxe4 correct? The
themes are now clear. More than anything else, white needs to organize
a coherent and effective assault on f4, and black needs to disrupt such
an assault. Variations will live and die according to how well they meet
these criteria.
There is only square from which white's QN will
figure into the fight over control of f4: g5. In fact, when white is unable
to play Ng5, he cannot attack f4 effectively, since a white KN on e2 can
always be neutralized by a black queen on e7 while the white QB on c1 is
neutralized by black's KB on h6. Hence, white needs to play Nxe4-g5. If,
however, he prefaces this with 8.Qd3, then, after 8...Nf6, 9.Ng5 runs into
9... Qe7+ 10.Nge2 (10.Qe2 would be inconsistent with 8.Qd3 and could be
adequately met with 10...Nd5.) 10...Nd5 when black again holds f4 and now
threatens to do more damage with ...Ne3. After 8.Bd3, on the other hand,
white rules the ...Nd5 resource out altogether due to the threat on h7
(ie. 8.Bd3 fxe4 9. Nxe4 Nf6 10.Ng5 Nd5 11.Nxh7) while white's queen is
ready to cancel black's queen on the e-file (ie. at the end of that line
11...Qe7+ is met with 12.Qe2.).
9...Nf6 10.Nge2
Possibly this deserves a "?" as well but 10.Bd3
would leave black a clear pawn up with possibly a positional advantage
as well.
10... Nxe4 11.Nxe4 Qe7 12.Qd3
Forced, since 12.Ng5 would lose to 12...f3 13.gxf3
Bxg5 14.hxg5 gxf3 15.g6 fxe2 16.Qxe2 Qxe2+ 17.Kxe2 h6(-+).
12...O-O 13.Bd2
I was very proud of this move. In a game against
Rashid Ziatdinov in the National Chess Congress last November which opened
1.e4 e5 2.f4 exf4 3.Nf3 d6 4.d4 g5 5.h4 g4 6.Ng1 f3 7.gxf3 Nf6, we later
reached a position in which I could have continued modestly with Bd2 and
0-0-0. I rejected this piece placement as too passive to justify the pawn
deficit, but later analysis showed that it would have been correct. This
was a powerful demonstration of the point that often in the Fisher defense
just getting the king to the queenside is a notable accomplishment for
white which is well worth a pawn or even passive or awkward piece placement.
In this game, after trying really hard to make work a variation in which
the QB refuses to move until it takes on f4 (for example, 13.g3 Bf5 14.Qb3+
Kh8 15.N4c3, which would run into 15...Nc6 when white's king is hurting
in the center.), I finally decided that king safety was more important
than the pawn or ideal development and looked forward to something like
13.Bd2 Bf5 14.Qb3+ Kh8 15.N4c3 Nc6 16.0-0-0 when white has reasonable compensation
for his pawn due to his pressure against black's king as well as his continued
pressure against f4 (ie.Raf1 and then finally g3).
Unfortunately, white's willingness to make
concessions to safeguard his king has come too late.
13...Bf5 14.Qb3+ Kh8 15.N4c3 Be4!
White is now without an adequate continuation:
16.0-0 Bxg2, or 16.0-0-0 Bxg2 17.Rhg1 Bf3 18.Rde1 Qf7 (though this latter
variation is what had to be tried).
16.Nxe4 Qxe4 17.d5 Nd7 18.Qb5 Nc5 19.Bc3+ Kg8 20.b4
a6 21.Qa5 f3 22.gxf3 Qxf3 0-1