v. mikhalevski, j. gallagher, a. martin - saemisch [e80-89]

Sämisch [E80−89]

Written by GM Victor Mikhalevski, GM Joe Gallagher and IM Andrew Martin

Last updated Saturday, May 20, 2006

XIIIIIIIIY 9rsnlwqk+-tr0 9zppzp-zppvlp0 9-+-zp-snp+0 9+-+-+-+-0 9-+PzPP+-+0 9+-sN-+P+-0 9PzP-+-+PzP0 9tR-vLQmKLsNR0 xiiiiiiiiy

f you had asked the late Eddie Gufeld what he thought of the Sämisch he will surely

ask you what your Knight on g1 thinks ... MOI FRIEND'......'OI WEEN MANY

BEEEYOUTEEFOLL GAMES AGAINST THEES VARIANT'...... Yet going into the

twenty−first century the Sämisch Variation continues to be hotly debated. White's solid

centre, reinforced by the pawn on f3 gives him the time to build a dangerous attacking

formation, leading to direct threats against Black's King. Alternatively White may play for a

positional squeeze, using his space advantage to constrict Black's game. Perhaps the fact

that White can vary his approach gives 5 f3 its appeal. To entertain hopes of success, Black

must time his counterattack on the White centre very accurately indeed. As e4 and c4 are

solidly protected, the d4 pawn is usually the focal point for this pressure. Attempts to attack

or win the game by gaining space on the Kingside are by and large unsuccessful.

I

All the games given in blue can be accessed via ChessPub.exe, simply head for their respective ECO code.

Contents

1 d4 ¤f6 2 c4 g6 3 ¤c3 ¥g7 4 e4 d6 5 f3


5...0-0

5...c6 6 ¥e3 a6 Sämisch−without 5...0-0 [E80]

6 ¥e3

6 ¤ge2 Sämisch−5...0-0 Intro [E81]

6...e5

6...¤c6 7 ¤ge2 a6 8 £d2 (8 a3 Sämisch−Panno Intro [E83]) 8...¦b8 9 h4 Sämisch−Panno Main line [E84]

6...b6 7 ¥d3 a6 Sämisch−6...b6 [E82]

7 d5

7 ¤ge2 Sämisch−6...e5 7 Nge2 c6 [E86]

7...c6

2

XIIIIIIIIY 9rsnlwq-trk+0 9zpp+-+pvlp0 9-+pzp-snp+0 9+-+Pzp-+-0 9-+P+P+-+0 9+-sN-vLP+-0 9PzP-+-+PzP0 9tR-+QmKLsNR0 xiiiiiiiiy

7...¤h5 Sämisch−6...e5 7 d5 without 7...c6 [E87]

8 ¤ge2

8 ¥d3 Sämisch−6...e5 7 d5 c6 without 7 Nge2 [E88]

8...cxd5 9 cxd5 ¤bd7 10 £d2

Sämisch−6...e5, old main line 8 Nge2 [E89]

Press F5 to toggle the Navigation Pane, then click on the appropriate bookmark to go

straight to that section.

Ctrl + 2 resizes the page.

All rights reserved Chess Publishing Ltd

3

Sämisch − without 5...0-0 [E80]

Last updated: 04/08/04 by Victor Mikhalevski

1 d4 ¤f6 2 c4 g6 3 ¤c3 ¥g7 4 e4 d6 5 f3


Enter the Sämisch Variation with a bang, one of White's most dangerous Anti−King's

Indian weapons. The reinforcement of the pawn at e4 gives the White centre formidable solidity and Black must organise his counterplay with considerable care. The Sämisch Variation is popular at all levels, with Grandmaster and club player alike. In this section, we consider tries by Black which involve delaying castling on move five.

5...c6

The Byrne Variation. After 5...c6 Black prepares ...a6 and ...b5, but even here he usually finds the move ...e7−e5 indispensable − that will come sooner rather than later. This variation is not so bad. Black does well to delay castling for a while, in order to create counterplay.

5...a6!? Preserving options and worth consideration. Black might be able to trick White into a favourable line of the Byrne Variation eg 5...c6 and only ...a6 later. 6 ¥e3 ¤c6 7 ¤ge2 ¦b8 8 ¦b1 (8 ¤c1 Platonov−Shamkovich/USSR Ch 1971) 8...0-0 9 £d2 Novikov,I−Shibut,M/Millennium II Open, Virginia Beach USA 2001.

5...b6!? 6 ¥e3 ¥b7 7 £d2 c5 8 d5 and I managed to talk White into castling on the wrong side! Ljukmanov−Martin,A/World Corres Semi Final 1994.

6 ¥e3 a6 7 £d2

4

7 ¥d3 b5?! 8 e5! a very strong move! 8...¤fd7 9 f4 Portisch,L−Kavalek,L/Wijk−aan−Zee 1975.

7...b5 8 0-0-0

XIIIIIIIIY 9rsnlwqk+-tr0 9+-+-zppvlp0 9p+pzp-snp+0 9+p+-+-+-0 9-+PzPP+-+0 9+-sN-vLP+-0 9PzP-wQ-+PzP0 9+-mKR+LsNR0 xiiiiiiiiy

8...bxc4

8...£a5! is a far superior idea to Evans's greedy play. Black gets on with the job, 9 ¢b1 ¤bd7 10 g4 ¦b8 11 h4 h5 12 g5 ¤h7 13 ¦h2 ¤hf8 14 ¦c1 ¤b6 15 cxb5 axb5∓ de Carbonnel,H−Berliner,H/5th Corres World Final 1965.

9 ¥xc4 0-0 10 h4 d5 11 ¥b3 dxe4 12 h5!! exf3 13 hxg6 hxg6 14 ¥h6 fxg2 15 ¦h4 ¤g4 16 ¥xg7 ¢xg7 17 £xg2±

Spassky,B−Evans,L/Varna Olympiad 1962.

5

Sämisch − 5...0-0 Intro [E81]

Last updated: 06/02/06 by Victor Mikhalevski A big section this with lots of important variations. 6 ¥g5 and 6 ¤ge2 show that White

does not need to play mechanically in the Sämisch− he can vary his approach. Combined with 6 ¥e3 these moves provide enviable variety and ensure that Black must have a separate, independent reply to each. Of the three White sixth moves I have a preference for 6 ¥g5.

1 d4 ¤f6 2 c4 g6 3 ¤c3 ¥g7 4 e4 d6 5 f3 0-0 6 ¥e3

This is the normal move. Alternatively: 6 ¥g5

XIIIIIIIIY 9rsnlwq-trk+0 9zppzp-zppvlp0 9-+-zp-snp+0 9+-+-+-vL-0 9-+PzPP+-+0 9+-sN-+P+-0 9PzP-+-+PzP0 9tR-+QmKLsNR0 xiiiiiiiiy

6...c5 a) 6...a6 7 £d2 (7 ¦c1!? the idea is to keep the f1-bishop open to prevent b5, 7...¤bd7

8 b3 anticipating ...c5 followed by ...b5 and still leaving the light−squared bishop's diagonal open, Ivanchuk,V−Svidler,P/Monte Carlo MNC 2004) 7...c6 8 ¥d3 b5!? interesting, Georgiev plays along the lines of the Byrne System, ignoring traditional thinking that Black should concentrate on d4 now that the Bishop stands on g5, Rahman,Y−Georgiev,K, Golden Cleopatra, Cairo EGY 2002

b) 6...¤bd7 7 £d2 c5 8 d5 £a5 9 ¤ge2 a6 10 a4 Riazantsev,A−Kempinski,R/Geneva SUI 2005

7 d5 e6 8 £d2 exd5 9 ¤xd5!? interesting, if allowed White will reinforce this Knight with ¤e2−c3 and grip the position. Black's next move is accurate: 9...¥e6 10 ¤e2 ¥xd5 11 cxd5 ¤bd7 12 ¤c3 a6 13 ¦c1! (13 ¥e2 Mazock,M−Negulescu,A/NCC, Philadelphia USA 2001) 13...b5 14 b3 Psakhis,L−Avrukh,B/Tel Aviv 1999.

6

6 ¤ge2 XIIIIIIIIY 9rsnlwq-trk+0 9zppzp-zppvlp0 9-+-zp-snp+0 9+-+-+-+-0 9-+PzPP+-+0 9+-sN-+P+-0 9PzP-+N+PzP0 9tR-vLQmKL+R0 xiiiiiiiiy

What will White do with the c1-bishop? He keeps Black guessing. 6...c5 Proposing

Benoni−like play. a) 6...e5 could transpose into the Saemisch main line, 7 ¥g5 c6 (7...h6 8 ¥e3 ¤c6 9 d5

¤e7 10 £d2 ¢h7 11 g4! c6 12 0-0-0! Hillarp Persson,T−Thorsteinsson,E, Open, Reykjavik ISL 2002 this is known from the Gligoric System and analogous lines. White can effect a vigorous attack. The Knight on e7 is only useful when Black wants to motor down the Kingside − in this case it is a spectator.) 8 £d2 ¤bd7 9 0-0-0 Korchnoi,V−Thipsay,P/Goodricke Open, Calcutta IND 2000.

b) 6...c6 7 ¥g5 a6 8 £d2 b5 Khenkin,I−Kozul,Z/Belgrade 1999. c) 6...a6 7 ¥e3 (7 ¥g5 ¤c6 8 £d2 ¦b8 9 h4 Muir,A−Fedorov,A/Eu Team Ch, Batumi

GEO 1999) 7...c6 8 c5 to hinder ...b5, (8 £d2 b5 (8...¤bd7 9 h4 the most aggressive, 9...h5 10 0-0-0 e5 11 g4 too optimistic, Moiseenko,A−Van Wely,L/Khanty Mansyisk RUS 2005) 9 h4!? is a more direct approach, Morozevich,A−Svidler,P/San Luis ARG 2005) but 8...b5!? anyway, (8...a5 9 cxd6 exd6 10 ¤g3 ¦e8 11 £d2 Petrosian,T−Visier/Nice Olympiad 1974, 8...¤bd7 9 ¦c1 b6 10 cxd6 exd6 11 ¤f4 c5 Dreev,A−Lalic,B/Hastings 2000) 9 cxd6 exd6 10 ¤c1 ¤bd7 11 ¥e2 ¦e8 Ward,C−Hebden,M/Scarborough 2001. Black is scoring well in this section. Against both 6 ¤ge2 and 6 ¥g5 the Byrne idea of ...c6, ...a6 etc seems very playable indeed.

d) 6...¤bd7 7 ¥g5 c5 8 d5 a6 (8...h6!? 9 ¥e3 h5 Black's idea is to prevent the typical ¤g3 which now can be answered with ...h4, 10 ¤c1 ¤h7 11 ¥e2 ¤e5 12 0-0 f5!?

Grischuk,A−Smirin,I/Beer Sheva ISR 2005) 9 a4 h6 10 ¥e3 ¤e5 11 ¤g3 Gallagher,J−Wajih,N/Goodricke Open, Calcutta IND 2001.

7 d5

7

XIIIIIIIIY 9rsnlwq-trk+0 9zpp+-zppvlp0 9-+-zp-snp+0 9+-zpP+-+-0 9-+P+P+-+0 9+-sN-+P+-0 9PzP-+N+PzP0 9tR-vLQmKL+R0 xiiiiiiiiy

(7 ¥e3 ¤bd7 8 £d2 a6 9 0-0-0 (9 ¥h6!? this move was tested by Lautier earlier against

nobody less than Garry Kasparov himself, 9...¥xh6 the main line, 10 £xh6 b5!

Lautier,J−Yurtaev,L/Moscow RUS 2004, 9 a4 e6 a tricky new move. The idea is to switch to Benoni positions, Malakhatko,V−Kritz,L/Triesen LIE 2004) 9...£a5 10 ¢b1 b5 11 ¤d5 ¤xd5!? a classic sac, 12 £xa5 ¤xe3© with comp, Bobotsov,M−Tal,M/Varna 1958.) 7...a6 (7...e6 8 ¤g3 exd5 9 cxd5 is a Benoni, but may transpose, 9...¤h5!? Socko,B−Iskusnyh,S/Cappelle la Grande FRA 2005) 8 a4 e6 9 ¤g3 exd5 10 cxd5 h5!? (10...¤bd7 11 ¥e2 h5 12 ¥g5 £c7 (12...¦b8 13 £d2 £c7 14 ¥h6 c4

Korchnoi,V−Xie Jun/Sonsbeek−Arnhem 1999.) 13 £d2 ¤h7 14 ¥h6 ¦b8 15 ¥xg7 ¢xg7 Gallagher,J−Balogh,T/Mitropa Team Cup, Charleville FRA 2000.) 11 ¥e2! (11 ¥g5 £a5 a new move which puts certain pressure on White's queenside, Svetushkin,D−Valmana Canto,J/La Roda ESP 2005) 11...h4 (11...¤h7 12 ¥e3 ¤d7 13 0-0 h4 14 ¤h1 f5 somehow this logical move order remains almost unexplored. Black creates a positional threat of ...f4 which would force the bishop either to leave the g1-d4 diagonal, or to occupy the f2−square, which leaves the knight on h1 out of play, 15 £d2 £f6 16 exf5 (16 f4 fxe4 Dreev,A−Karpov,A/Reykjavik ISL 2004)

16...gxf5 17 ¤f2!? Dreev,A−Nataf,I/Calvia ESP 2004) 12 ¤f1 ¤h7 13 ¥e3 ¤d7 14 ¥f2 f5 15 exf5 gxf5 16 f4 £f6! an improvement, (16...¦e8 Dreev,A−Gallagher,J/Catalan Bay ENG 2004) 17 ¤d2 £h6! Malakhatko,V−Damljanovic,B/Sozina SCG 2004.

6...¤bd7!?

8

XIIIIIIIIY 9r+lwq-trk+0 9zppzpnzppvlp0 9-+-zp-snp+0 9+-+-+-+-0 9-+PzPP+-+0 9+-sN-vLP+-0 9PzP-+-+PzP0 9tR-+QmKLsNR0 xiiiiiiiiy

An interesting line which is a lot more aggressive than it looks. Others: 6...c5 this was the hot move a while ago. Black offers a pawn sacrifice in return for which

he slows White up and gets all the dark squares. If the Sämisch pawn structure is inflexible, then this might be the way to show it up. 7 ¤ge2!? (7 dxc5 is critical 7...dxc5 8 £xd8 ¦xd8 9 ¥xc5 it has become quite rare for White to accept the gambit these days, 9...¤c6 10 ¥a3 a5! 11 ¦d1 ¥e6 12 ¤d5 ¤b4! an important resource, Rowson,J−Kotronias,V/Hastings ENG 2004, 7 d5 e6 8 ¥d3 exd5 9 cxd5 Lapiccirella,D−Mantovani,R/21st Open, Bratto ITA 2001) 7...¤c6 (7...£a5!? is not a novelty but a relatively rare move which deserves some attention, see Bogdanovski−Kempinski,R/Halkidiki GRE 2002) 8 d5 (8 £d2 e6 9 ¦d1 b6 10 ¥g5 ¥a6 11 d5 Atalik,S−Miles,A/Heraklion Open 1993.) 8...¤e5 9 ¤g3 e6 10 ¥e2 exd5 11 cxd5 a6 (the alternative way for Black to seek counterplay is to play 11...h5 12 0-0 ¤h7 13 £d2 (13 f4?! is a very suspicious novelty, Moiseenko,A−Nataf,I/Montreal CAN 2004)

13...h4 14 ¤h1 g5 this plan is becoming increasingly popular, see Kasimdzhanov,R−Volokitin,A/Katernberg GER 2003. In the past Black used to play the immediate ...f5 in such positions) 12 a4 h5 (12...¥d7 13 f4 ¤fg4! an astonishing move, Levitt,J−Beaumont,C/GB National League 1996) 13 0-0 ¤h7 14 £d2 h4 15 ¤h1 f5 16 ¤f2 ¦e8 the idea behind this move is to create additional pressure on the centre. At the same time after exf5 the rook will be situated on the open e−file, (16...¥d7

Kuzmin,A−Sandipan,C/Catalan Bay ENG 2004) 17 ¢h1 prophylaxis, Lautier,J−Kotronias,V/Moscow RUS 2004.

6...a6!? This move may become the hot line of the future. Black has numerous transpositional options depending on White's response. 7 ¥d3 (7 £d2 ¤bd7 8 ¤h3! White exploits his chance to bring this knight to f2, as usually this knight is a problem for White. (8 0-0-0 c6 9 h4 b5 10 ¥h6 e5 (10...¥xh6 11 £xh6 £a5

Azmaiparashvili,Z−Schmaltz,R/Dos Hermanas Internet Final, ICC INT (4) 2002) 11 ¤ge2 £a5 With the idea of b4, Moiseenko,A−Miroshnichenko,E/Kapuskasing CAN 2004) 8...c5 9 ¤f2 £a5 10 dxc5 dxc5 11 f4 e5 12 f5! with advantage, Lautier,J−Inarkiev,E/Izmir TUR 2004.) 7...c5?! 8 dxc5 dxc5 9 e5! only the very greedy should take the pawn: (9 ¥xc5 £c7? very poor − there are two adequate alternatives: (9...¤fd7, 9...¤c6) 10 ¥e3 ¤c6 11 £b3 Murey,J−Ramin,M/Open, Pula CRO 2002) 9...¤fd7 10 f4 ¤c6 11 ¤f3 see Christiansen,L−Ivanov,I/Reykjavik 1985.

9

7 £d2 c5 8 d5

8 ¤ge2 a6 9 ¦d1 (9 ¤c1 cxd4 10 ¥xd4 ¤e5 Sherwin,J−Reshevsky,S/New York−Rosenwald 1958) 9...£a5 10 ¤d5?! ¤xd5! 11 £xa5 ¤xe3 Basically Black just gets a whole load of dark squares and a very strong initiative for his queen sac, Vila Gazquez,J−Avrukh,B/Andorra la Vella AND 2003.

8...¤e5

XIIIIIIIIY 9r+lwq-trk+0 9zpp+-zppvlp0 9-+-zp-snp+0 9+-zpPsn-+-0 9-+P+P+-+0 9+-sN-vLP+-0 9PzP-wQ-+PzP0 9tR-+-mKLsNR0 xiiiiiiiiy

9 ¥g5

9 h3 ¤h5! 10 ¥f2 f5 11 exf5 ¦xf5! sacrificing a piece, 12 g4 ¦xf3 with an attack, 13 gxh5 (13 0-0-0!? ¤g3! Korchnoi,V−Roeder,M/Goodricke Open, Calcutta IND 2000)

13...£f8! Beliavsky,A−Nunn,J/Wijk−aan−Zee 1985.

9...e6

I became fascinated by this line whilst writing my book on the Saemisch and got the opportunity to play it about a week after the book came out!

9...a6 10 f4 ¤ed7 11 ¤f3 b5 12 ¥d3 Gonzalez Gil,E−Santos,C/Summer Festival Open, Lisbon POR 2000

10 f4 ¤eg4 11 dxe6 ¥xe6

10

XIIIIIIIIY 9r+-wq-trk+0 9zpp+-+pvlp0 9-+-zplsnp+0 9+-zp-+-vL-0 9-+P+PzPn+0 9+-sN-+-+-0 9PzP-wQ-+PzP0 9tR-+-mKLsNR0 xiiiiiiiiy

12 ¤f3 b5!

Faced with threats like h3 and f5 Black needs to do something and do it now. The text is designed to blow the centre open even at the cost of a piece, see Pelletier,Y−Gallagher,J/Villars 1995.

11

Sämisch − 6...b6 [E82]

Last updated: 14/03/03 by Joe Gallagher

1 d4 ¤f6 2 c4 g6 3 ¤c3 ¥g7 4 e4 d6 5 f3 0-0 6 ¥e3 b6

XIIIIIIIIY 9rsnlwq-trk+0 9zp-zp-zppvlp0 9-zp-zp-snp+0 9+-+-+-+-0 9-+PzPP+-+0 9+-sN-vLP+-0 9PzP-+-+PzP0 9tR-+QmKLsNR0 xiiiiiiiiy

The Double Fianchetto Variation has gone completely out of fashion. The main lines are

poor for Black and somebody will have to invest considerable energy in order to repair this idea.

7 ¥d3

7 £d2 c5

7...a6

7...¤fd7 is this the improvement we have all been waiting for? 8 ¤ge2 c5 9 £d2 ¤c6 10 ¥c2 e5 Soza,J−Zarnicki,P/VII Open, Linares CHI 2000.

8 ¤ge2 c5 9 e5

9 d5 is not as good as the main line featured here, but will be very common in practical play, 9...¤bd7 10 f4 e6 11 0-0 exd5 12 exd5 b5 13 cxb5 ¤b6 14 ¥f2 axb5 15 ¥xb5 ¥d7 16 ¥xd7 £xd7 17 £d3 £b7 18 ¦fd1 ¦fe8© A lot of players favouring active counterplay would be happy to take Black, Khismatullin,D−San Emeterio Cabanes,J, WYBl8, Oropesa del Mar ESP 2001.

9 0-0 ¤c6 10 d5 ¤e5 11 f4 ¤fg4!? A sharp idea, because Black is trying to annihilate his lower−rated opponent. But (11...¤xd3 12 £xd3 ¤g4 was also possible and about equal)

12

12 ¥c1 ¤xd3 13 £xd3 f5 14 h3 fxe4 15 ¤xe4 ¤h6 16 ¦b1 b5 17 b3 ¦b8 18 ¥d2 b4?! Closing the queenside limits Black's options and gives White a free hand on the other wing, Magalashvili,D−Yilmaz,T/3rd IECC, Batumi GEO 2002.

9...¤fd7 10 exd6 exd6 11 £d2²

XIIIIIIIIY 9rsnlwq-trk+0 9+-+n+pvlp0 9pzp-zp-+p+0 9+-zp-+-+-0 9-+PzP-+-+0 9+-sNLvLP+-0 9PzP-wQN+PzP0 9tR-+-mK-+R0 xiiiiiiiiy

Hort,V−Gligoric,S/Amsterdam 1970. Yes, Black's position is playable but White doesn't

need to think too much to place his Rooks in the centre followed by ¥h6. He would then maintain his edge.

13

Sämisch − Panno Intro [E83]


1 d4 ¤f6 2 c4 g6 3 ¤c3 ¥g7 4 e4 d6 5 f3 0-0 6 ¥e3 ¤c6

XIIIIIIIIY 9r+lwq-trk+0 9zppzp-zppvlp0 9-+nzp-snp+0 9+-+-+-+-0 9-+PzPP+-+0 9+-sN-vLP+-0 9PzP-+-+PzP0 9tR-+QmKLsNR0 xiiiiiiiiy

The Panno Variation, where Black chips away at the White centre with the help of moves

such as ...b7−b5 and ...e7−e5, propelled by necessary Rook support given by...¦b8 and ...¦e8. Play is complex and can be extremely sharp as White goes over to all−out Kingside attack. There are positional routes too for White so Black has to know a lot and keep up with all the latest developments. This is not a line one can just play using intuition.

7 ¤ge2

7 £d2 a6 8 ¤ge2 (8 0-0-0 b5!? Petursson,M−Gufeld,E/Hastings 1986.) 8...¦e8 this preparatory move is a luxury which Black can ill afford, the mainline (8...¦b8 is considered in [E84].) 9 ¦c1 ¥d7 Piket,J−Golubev,M/Baden−Baden GER 2002

7 ¥d3 is misplaced when Black can strike at d4, 7...e5 8 d5 ¤d4 as in Yu Mingyuan−Fernandez,R, FSIMA July, Budapest HUN 2001.

7...a6

14

XIIIIIIIIY 9r+lwq-trk+0 9+pzp-zppvlp0 9p+nzp-snp+0 9+-+-+-+-0 9-+PzPP+-+0 9+-sN-vLP+-0 9PzP-+N+PzP0 9tR-+QmKL+R0 xiiiiiiiiy

8 a3

To play on the queenside. Deviations from the Main Line aren't dangerous to Black who has the usual pawn attacks ...b7−b5 and ...e7−e5 available when necessary. The Samisch move f2−f3 is a little slow. Some of White's options here slow the game down even more.

8 h4 h5 9 ¤c1 e5 10 d5 ¤e7 11 ¥e2 ¤h7 Spassky,B−Fischer,R/Sveti Stefan/Belgrade 1992.

8 £d2 is more common.

8...¤d7

8...¥d7 9 b4 e5 10 d5 ¤e7 11 ¤c1 ¤h5 12 ¤b3 Browne,W−Gufeld,E/New York 1989.

9 b4 ¤b6 10 ¤c1 e5 11 d5 ¤d4 12 ¤b3 ¤xb3 13 £xb3 ¥h6!?

A standard trick to exchange dark−squared bishops, if the bishop is captured the fork ...£h4+ follows, Kanko,I−Resika,N/FSIM November, Budapest HUN 2000.

15

Sämisch − Panno Main line [E84]


1 d4 ¤f6 2 c4 g6 3 ¤c3 ¥g7 4 e4 d6 5 f3 0-0 6 ¥e3 ¤c6

The Panno Variation used to be Black's most popular way of meeting the Saemisch but now systems based on ...c5 have taken over.

Still, this is still one of Black's best replies to the Sämisch, and both Fischer and Kasparov favoured this line.

7 ¤ge2 a6 8 £d2 ¦b8

XIIIIIIIIY 9-trlwq-trk+0 9+pzp-zppvlp0 9p+nzp-snp+0 9+-+-+-+-0 9-+PzPP+-+0 9+-sN-vLP+-0 9PzP-wQN+PzP0 9tR-+-mKL+R0 xiiiiiiiiy

The most common line of the Panno. White must now choose his weapons.

9 h4

9 ¦c1 is a relatively rare line, which however has good statistics, 9...¥d7 10 ¤d1 e5 (10...a5!? before playing ...e5 Black wants to stop White's counterplay on the queenside, 11 g3 b6 12 ¥g2 e5 13 d5 ¤e7 with good play, Novikov,I−Efimenko,Z/Montreal CAN 2004) 11 d5 ¤e7 12 c5 ¤e8 13 b4 f5„ 14 ¤ec3 ¤f6 15 ¥e2 ¢h8 it isn't clear that this 'waiting' move is necessary. Of course the idea to improve the fate of the ¤e7 is a good one (¤g8−f6−h5−f4 etc) but it's time−consuming, Nenashev,A−Nunn,J/Bundesliga 2001.

9 ¤c1 e5 In this line Black waits for the knight from e2 to move before playing...e5 as he wants to jump into d4 after White plays d5. 10 d5 ¤d4 (10...¤e7 11 g4 ¤d7 12 ¥d3 f5

Stryjecki,M−Socko,B, 59th ch−POL, Warsaw POL 2002.) 11 ¤b3 c5 a standard pawn sacrifice in such positions, 12 dxc6 bxc6 13 ¤xd4 exd4 14 ¥xd4 White has

16

won a pawn but he is lagging in development and his king is still in the centre. Black's dream is to land on b2, the meeting point of his two star pieces. But first he must try and blast open the centre, see the exciting Ehlvest,J−Smirin,I/Connecticut USA 2003.

9 ¦b1!? With the text White plans to seize even more space, 9...b5 (9...e5 10 d5 ¤e7 11 b4 ¤e8

and a quick ...f5 might be a better way to take advantage of White's pedestrian ninth move. White's plan of b4 etc takes time to put into practice− meanwhile his King is still in the centre. Black MUST be energetic.) 10 cxb5 axb5 11 b4 ¥d7 (11...e5 12 d5

¤e7 13 ¤g3 Dreev,A−Efimenko,Z, Aeroflot Open, Moscow RUS 2002) 12 d5 ¤e5 13 ¤d4 e6 Malakhatko,V−Miroshnichenko,E/Simferopol UKR 2003.

9...h5

The most critical line of the Panno. The question is whether Black should block White's attack with h5 or not. In practice he usually does these days.

9...b5 10 h5 e5 (10...bxc4 is considered very risky for Black, 11 ¥h6 ¤b4 12 ¤g3 ¥xh6 13 £xh6

¤c2+ 14 ¢d1 ¤xa1 15 hxg6 Rajlich,V−Zalkind,K/FSIMB July, Budapest HUN 2000.) 11 d5 ¤a5 12 ¤g3 bxc4 13 0-0-0 ¥d7 14 ¤ge2? What a shocking move! OK, White would like to have the move g4 in but his first priority is to be in a position to defend his b2 square, Nguyen Anh Dung−To Quoc Khanh/Ho Chi Minh City VIE 2003.

10 0-0-0

10 ¥g5 b5 11 g4 bxc4 12 ¤g3 ¤xd4! 13 £xd4 ¦xb2 14 £e3 hxg4∓ cp−not2deep/Internet Chess Club 2000.

10 ¤c1 e5 11 d5 ¤d4 12 ¤b3 c5 13 dxc6 bxc6 14 ¤xd4 exd4 15 ¥xd4 Levitt,J−Buckley,G/Hampstead 1999.

10...b5

XIIIIIIIIY 9-trlwq-trk+0 9+-zp-zppvl-0 9p+nzp-snp+0 9+p+-+-+p0 9-+PzPP+-zP0 9+-sN-vLP+-0 9PzP-wQN+P+0 9+-mKR+L+R0 xiiiiiiiiy

11 ¤d5

17

11 ¥h6 e5 12 ¤d5 bxc4 13 ¥xg7 ¢xg7 14 ¤xf6 £xf6 Rowson,J−Gallagher,J/ch−GBR, Torquay ENG 2002, Black has nullified White's initiative and stands slightly better now.

11...bxc4 12 ¤xf6+ ¥xf6 13 g4 hxg4 14 h5 e5?!

I prefer 14...gxf3! when the following, sharp lines should be checked. 15 ¤c3 (15 ¤g3 e5!)

15...g5 (15...e5 16 hxg6 exd4 17 £h2 ¥h4 18 ¥xd4 £g5+ 19 ¢b1 ¤xd4 20 ¦xd4 fxg6 21 ¥xc4+

¢g7 22 £xh4 £xh4 23 ¦xh4 g5÷) 16 ¥xg5 ¥xg5 17 £xg5+ ¢h7 18 ¤d5 ¦g8 Cedikova,K−Vismara,D/Open, Estensi ITA 2001.

15 hxg6 fxg6 16 ¤c3 ¤xd4 17 ¥xd4 exd4 18 ¥xc4+

Nguyen Anh Dung−Wang Rui/FSGM February, Budapest HUN 2000. Devastation from the Black end but that is hardly the end of the story.

18

Sämisch − 6...e5 Intro [E85]


1 d4 ¤f6 2 c4 g6 3 ¤c3 ¥g7 4 e4 d6 5 f3 0-0 6 ¥e3 e5

Let's now turn our attention to lines where Black plays an early ...e7−e5. This of course is the traditional, old−style King's Indian move. Perhaps play is a little too one−dimensional for the modern King' s Indian specialist so 6...e5 isn't anything like as popular as it once was. Nevertheless, it is still worth a try.

7 ¤ge2

XIIIIIIIIY 9rsnlwq-trk+0 9zppzp-+pvlp0 9-+-zp-snp+0 9+-+-zp-+-0 9-+PzPP+-+0 9+-sN-vLP+-0 9PzP-+N+PzP0 9tR-+QmKL+R0 xiiiiiiiiy

Is an attempt to confuse Black and lead him into an inferior game. As we'll see, Black has

been very obliging of late, with early moves of the ...¤b8, but if he stays flexible with 7...c6!, he has every chance for equality in an interesting game. Of course 7 dxe5 is also playable, known from Botvinnik−Tal. There the move worked well thanks to Tal's impatience but we are more experienced these days ... .... maybe ....

7...¤c6?!

7...c6 8 £d2 ¤bd7 9 0-0-0 £a5 would be my choice, see the next code.

8 d5 ¤a5

8...¤e7?! is not a good square for this Knight in the Samisch. Results heavily favour White.

9 ¤c1 c5 10 a3 b6 11 ¥e2 ¥a6?!

19

Braun,A−Antognini,F, TCh−Europe Boys Ul8 2001, Just 11...¤e8 was reasonable e.g. 12 b4 ¤b7 13 0-0 f5.

20

Sämisch − 6...e5 7 Nge2 c6 [E86]


1 d4 ¤f6 2 c4 g6 3 ¤c3 ¥g7 4 e4 d6 5 f3 0-0 6 ¥e3 e5

I figure that the popularity of this line will decline. Black plays in traditional style, usually with ...f7−f5 somewhere, but with e4 reinforced it's unsurprising that the overall results favour White.

7 ¤ge2

XIIIIIIIIY 9rsnlwq-trk+0 9zppzp-+pvlp0 9-+-zp-snp+0 9+-+-zp-+-0 9-+PzPP+-+0 9+-sN-vLP+-0 9PzP-+N+PzP0 9tR-+QmKL+R0 xiiiiiiiiy

White retains tension in the centre, hoping to profit. 7 d5 is, of course, the major alternative.

7...c6 8 £d2

8 £b3 the text is rather unusual nowadays. I, Joe, became intrigued by 8 £b3 whilst writing my book on the Saemisch, 8...¤bd7 this is what nearly everyone plays (but the most critical continuation, as demonstrated by Mikhail Tal back in the 1950's is 8...exd4 9

¤xd4 d5) 9 0-0-0 £e7 probably the best move in this rather tricky position for Black, Sasikiran,K−Thipsay,P/Mumbai IND 2003.

8...¤bd7

In this line Black cannot fiddle around or White will get a GRIP. Black must be willing to continue aggressively, maybe even sacrificing his d−pawn along the way.

21

9 0-0-0

This is sharpest, but Black gets obvious counterchances, 9 ¦d1 a6 10 dxe5 ¤xe5 11 b3 b5 12 cxb5 axb5 13 £xd6?! ¤fd7„ gave counterplay in

Karpov,A−Kasparov,G/Linares 1993.

9...a6 10 ¢b1

XIIIIIIIIY 9r+lwq-trk+0 9+p+n+pvlp0 9p+pzp-snp+0 9+-+-zp-+-0 9-+PzPP+-+0 9+-sN-vLP+-0 9PzP-wQN+PzP0 9+K+R+L+R0 xiiiiiiiiy

if 10 ¥h6 then 10...¥xh6 11 £xh6 b5 is best

10...b5 11 c5!?

This is Graf's speciality which has been underestimated until recently. Black should be aware of this possibility in a number of variations in the King's Indian where he tries to hold the centre.

11 ¤c1 exd4! creates immediate worries for White. (11...¥b7?! is Ivanchuk,V−Zapata,A/Novi Sad Ol 1990) 12 ¥xd4 ¦e8 13 ¤b3 ¦b8!? new, Black keeps the pressure on and doesn't want to bring his bishop to a passive square on f8, Jobava,B−Smirin,I/Beer Sheva ISR 2005.

11...exd4

11...b4 Istratescu,A−Akopian,V, IECC, Ohrid MKD 2001.

12 ¤xd4 ¤e5 13 cxd6 £xd6 14 ¤b3!

with the primary idea of controlling the c5 square, Graf,A−Kovalev,A/Bled SLO 2002.

22

Sämisch − 6...e5 7 d5 without 7...c6 [E87]


1 d4 ¤f6 2 c4 g6 3 ¤c3 ¥g7 4 e4 d6 5 f3 0-0 6 ¥e3 e5 7 d5 ¤h5

XIIIIIIIIY 9rsnlwq-trk+0 9zppzp-+pvlp0 9-+-zp-+p+0 9+-+Pzp-+n0 9-+P+P+-+0 9+-sN-vLP+-0 9PzP-+-+PzP0 9tR-+QmKLsNR0 xiiiiiiiiy

The Uhlmann Variation, introduced by 7...¤h5, is a little too straightforward for modern

taste. It is not popular at the highest level any more. Of Black's seventh move alternatives, I prefer 7...¤bd7, as long as he plays a quick ...c7−c6, transposing back into a main line.

7...¤bd7 8 ¤h3 ¤h5 9 £c2 (9 g4 ¤f4 10 ¤xf4 exf4 11 ¥xf4 ¤e5 12 ¥e2 f5© Seirawan−Istratescu/Moscow Ol 1994.) 9...f5 10 0-0-0 f4 11 ¥g1 ¦f7 12 ¤f2 g5 13 ¥e2 ¥f8 14 ¤d3 ¥e7 15 ¥f2 ¤hf6 16 ¢b1 a6 17 g3 ¤f8 18 gxf4 gxf4 19 c5!± Piket,J−Nijboer,F/ch−NED Leeuwarden NED 2001.

8 £d2 £h4+

This is an idea which Andy Martin recommended in 'Winning with the King's Indian' back in 1989. Black offers a Queen sacrifice in the style of David Bronstein and shows that there are still many unanswered questions in this highway of the Saemisch.

8...f5 9 0-0-0 f4?! how can Black hope for anything if he blocks the Kingside like this? 10 ¥f2 ¢h8 11 ¢b1 a6 12 ¤ge2 ¤d7 13 ¤c1 ¤df6 14 c5 ¥d7 15 ¤b3 b5 16 ¤a5± Kasparov,S−Gladyszev,O, Open, Bethune FRA 2001.

9 g3

9 ¥f2 £f4

23

9...¤xg3!?

XIIIIIIIIY 9rsnl+-trk+0 9zppzp-+pvlp0 9-+-zp-+p+0 9+-+Pzp-+-0 9-+P+P+-wq0 9+-sN-vLPsn-0 9PzP-wQ-+-zP0 9tR-+-mKLsNR0 xiiiiiiiiy

10 £f2 ¤xf1 11 £xh4 ¤xe3

We haven't seen so much of this queen sacrifice in recent times mainly because Black no longer plays the classical 6...e5 against the Saemisch very often.

12 ¢e2

12 £f2 ¤xc4 13 ¤b5 ¤a6 14 b3 ¤b6 Black has two minor pieces and two pawns for the queen, which is only a slight material deficit, and an extremely compact position with no weaknesses. It is not easy for White to attack anything and in practice Black scores extremely well from such positions, see Studnicka,T−Klima,L/Pilsen−Lobzy CZE 2003.

12...¤xc4 13 ¦c1 ¥d7!?

A twist employed by Jeroen Piket after 13...¤a6 and 13 ...c6 had been examined and presumably discarded. It's possible that 13...¥d7 makes the Queen sacrifice line playable all over again.

13...¤a6 14 ¤d1 ¤b6 15 ¤e3 ¥d7 16 ¤h3 f6÷

14 ¤d1 ¤b6!? 15 ¦xc7

White bites the cherry. Of course this is the critical move but the Black pieces are allowed to take up good positions. Others:

15 ¤e3 c6 16 ¤h3 (16 dxc6 ¤xc6„) 16...cxd5 17 exd5 ¤a6?! It was better to freeze the Knight on h3 with (17...f6! 18 ¤f2 f5© only after ¤f2 does Black go through with this key move) 18 ¤g5 h6 19 ¤e4 ¤b4 Kuzmin,A−Piket,J, Oostende 1991.

15...¤a6 16 ¦xd7?!

24

A novelty from Alexander Volzhin. White attempts to break Black's initiative by returning material. It is arguable whether

16 ¦xb7 is better though: 16...¥b5+ 17 ¢f2 ¤c5 18 ¦c7 ¤d3+ 19 ¢g3 ¤f4© I like Black. White is very tied up, his King is precariously placed and he lacks activity. Naturally it's very unclear − this assessment is very subjective.

16...¤xd7 17 ¤h3 ¦ac8! 18 ¤e3 f6!

One key to this line is the shutting down of the knight on h3. That is the precise purpose of ...f7−f6, Volzhin,A−Rohl,J/Ubeda 1997.

25

Sämisch − 6...e5 7 d5 c6 without 7 Nge2

[E88]


1 d4 ¤f6 2 c4 g6 3 ¤c3 ¥g7 4 e4 d6 5 f3 0-0 6 ¥e3 e5 7 d5 c6

XIIIIIIIIY 9rsnlwq-trk+0 9zpp+-+pvlp0 9-+pzp-snp+0 9+-+Pzp-+-0 9-+P+P+-+0 9+-sN-vLP+-0 9PzP-+-+PzP0 9tR-+QmKLsNR0 xiiiiiiiiy

The main move here. Both 8 ¥d3 and 8 £d2 seem to promise White a pleasant advantage

based on an advantage in space and an almost unassailable centre. Black struggles to achieve equality in both these lines which is why attention has turned elsewhere.

8 ¥d3

Alternatively: 8 £d2 cxd5 9 cxd5 ¤bd7 (9...a6 10 ¥d3 ¤h5 11 ¤ge2 f5 Movsziszian,K−Garcia

Luque,A/TCh−ESP Div 2001) 10 ¥d3 a6 11 ¤ge2 b5 12 0-0 ¤c5 13 ¥c2 b4 14 ¤a4 ¤xa4 15 ¥xa4 ¦b8 16 ¦ac1! a5 17 ¦c2! ¥d7 18 ¥xd7 £xd7 19 ¦c6± Reilly,T−Depasquale,C/Oceana zt, Warwick Fiji FIJ 2002. Positions such as these have given this variation a very bad name, the Rook on c6 grips Black's game like a vice.

8...cxd5 9 cxd5 ¤h5!?

If anything is going to work in this position, then either 9...¤e8 or this will be the move. Black prepares ...f7−f5 in the quickest possible manner.

26

10 ¤ge2 f5 11 exf5 gxf5 12 0-0 ¤d7

XIIIIIIIIY 9r+lwq-trk+0 9zpp+n+-vlp0 9-+-zp-+-+0 9+-+Pzpp+n0 9-+-+-+-+0 9+-sNLvLP+-0 9PzP-+N+PzP0 9tR-+Q+RmK-0 xiiiiiiiiy

The main move. 12...a6 is an uncommon line. Before developing the knight to d7 Black decides to take

control of the b5−square, 13 ¦c1 ¤d7 14 b4 Preventing ...¤c5, Muhammad,S−Smirin,I/Minneapolis USA 2005.

13 £d2

13 ¢h1 a6?! (13...¤c5) 14 ¥xf5! Brunner,L−Gallagher,J/Bern 1993.

13...¤df6 14 ¢h1 ¢h8 15 ¥g5!?

An annoying pin,

15...¥d7 16 £c2!

XIIIIIIIIY 9r+-wq-tr-mk0 9zpp+l+-vlp0 9-+-zp-sn-+0 9+-+PzppvLn0 9-+-+-+-+0 9+-sNL+P+-0 9PzPQ+N+PzP0 9tR-+-+R+K0 xiiiiiiiiy

With advantage, Lautier,J−Smirin,I/Birmingham ENG 2006.

27

Sämisch − 6...e5, old main line 8 Nge2

[E89]


1 d4 ¤f6 2 c4 g6 3 ¤c3 ¥g7 4 e4 d6 5 f3 0-0 6 ¥e3 e5 7 d5 c6 8 ¤ge2

XIIIIIIIIY 9rsnlwq-trk+0 9zpp+-+pvlp0 9-+pzp-snp+0 9+-+Pzp-+-0 9-+P+P+-+0 9+-sN-vLP+-0 9PzP-+N+PzP0 9tR-+QmKL+R0 xiiiiiiiiy

An older variation, where White prefers ¤ge2 to the immediate £d2. As you will see, only

Alexei Dreev among the top players is willing to essay this line.

8...cxd5 9 cxd5 ¤bd7

9...¤e8! 10 g4?! (10 £d2 f5÷) 10...¥h6! is a trick worth remembering, immediately giving Black a good game:

28

XIIIIIIIIY 9rsnlwqntrk+0 9zpp+-+p+p0 9-+-zp-+pvl0 9+-+Pzp-+-0 9-+-+P+P+0 9+-sN-vLP+-0 9PzP-+N+-zP0 9tR-+QmKL+R0 xiiiiiiiiy

11 ¥xh6 £h4+ 12 ¤g3 £xh6 as in Sekulovska,V−Georgieva,L, ch−Balkan Women,

Istanbul TUR 2001 among others.

10 £d2 ¤e8

XIIIIIIIIY 9r+lwqntrk+0 9zpp+n+pvlp0 9-+-zp-+p+0 9+-+Pzp-+-0 9-+-+P+-+0 9+-sN-vLP+-0 9PzP-wQN+PzP0 9tR-+-mKL+R0 xiiiiiiiiy

11 h4! f5 12 h5

Dreev,A−Kozul,Z/Bosnia 2001. SUMMARY: 8 ¤ge2 gives Black a little more rope then 8 £d2 − he has more options. That's why most

masters prefer £d2, reserving the option of a ¥d3 and only THEN ¤ge2 set−up. Perhaps 8 ¤ge2 is more angled at a Kingside initiative. In the final position of the Dreev game just featured the Bishop remained on f1!

29

v. mikhalevski, j. gallagher, a. martin - saemisch [e80-89]

Documents