Table Of ContentThe Instructor
You may have some of books. Titles such as Secrets of Chess
Training, Secrets of Chess Tactics or Training for the
Tournament Player, to name just three. Books recognized
throughout the chess world for their excellence and depth. You
may have heard his name mentioned as chess trainer
extraordinaire. Among his students are included Yusupov,
Dolmatov and Dreev. It is almost superfluous to mention that he
won the Moscow Championship in 1973, finished fifth in the
USSR Championship in 1974 and was awarded the title of
International Master in 1975. The second issue of the American
Chess Journal (1992) featured an in-depth look at this modest
Moscow master. It was entitled The World's Best Chess Trainer.
The
There is not much to say after that.
We sincerely hope you enjoy his new column at The Chess Cafe.
Instructor
Mark Dvoretsky is... The Instructor
Mark Dvoretsky
Candidate Moves
In the November 1999 issue of Europe Echecs, a fragment of a game Adams -
Shirov appears, which I used as a classroom exercise during my visit to France
last autumn. Later, back home in Moscow, I went over my analyses again. The
position turned out to be a lot deeper, more complex, than I had at first realized
- although the overall conclusion remained unchanged: White did not choose
the strongest continuation. Allow me to offer you a new and considerably
expanded version of my commentaries.
First, let me explain why I think this analysis might interest my readers. It
seems to me that we are all occasionally guilty of underestimating the richness
of ideas which lie beneath the surface of even the simplest, quietest-looking
positions. And it is not just the lowly amateur who is guilty; sometimes it can
even be a very strong grandmaster. The result is that our game becomes the
poorer for it, we examine only a fraction of the possibilities at our disposal
and/or at our opponent’s, and miss hidden resources, both for attack and for
defense.
One of the most important means of conducting analysis - and one which is
tailor-made for the elimination of the aforementioned shortcoming - is the
principle of "candidate moves". I will not go into detail here on this; those who
wish to may read more in my books, as well as those of Kotov, Nunn, Tisdall
and others. I shall only say that the following analysis is, in my view, a pretty
decent illustration of this principle. (See Diagram)
file:///C|/Cafe/Dvoretsky/dvoretsky.htm (1 of 4) [10/11/2000 8:42:09 AM]
The Instructor
Adams-Shirov Linares 1997
Black’s minor pieces on the d-file are
vulnerable, and the rook at e3 is tied to the
defense of the bishop. So all forcing moves
which carry a direct threat must be
examined. These are: 20. Kf2, 20. Rd1, 20.
Bb2 (threatening 21. Rad1), 20. Ba3, and
20. Nf1.
1) 20. Kf2. Adams, in Informant #69, gives
the following variation: 20... Rfe8 21. Rd1
Re2+ 22. Nxe2 Rxe2+ 23. Kg1 Bxf5 24.
Bf4+/=. His final position is, in fact, about
equal: 24... Nf6 25. Rd2 (25. Bxc7? Be4) Rxd2 26. Bxd2 Nd5. But Black has
an alternative right at the start (candidate moves must also be found for the
opponent!) 20...Rxg3?! 21. Kxg3 Nc5 (threatening 22...Ne4+) After 22. Ba3!
Ne4+ 23. Kf4 (23. Kh4?! g5+! 24. Kh5 Nxd2 25. Bxf8 Kxf8) 23... Rxf5+! 24.
Kxf5 Nxd2+ 25. Ke6 Nb1! gives rise to a most unusual situation, difficult to
evaluate.
2) 20. Rd1 Rxg3 21. hg Bxf5+/= (Adams). After 22. Bf4 Rc8!, White cannot
prevent the maneuver Nf6(b6)-d5, which will equalize completely.
3) 20. Bb2 Rxg3 (20...Nb6 21. f6!? gf 22. Bd4 Rxg3 23. hg Bg6 24. Bxb6 cb
25. Re1 is worse) 21. hg Bxf5 22. Re1. Now 22...h6? is bad, in view of 23. Rf2!
Rf7 24. Re8+ Kh7 25. g4+-; but 22...h5! appears to maintain rough equality.
4) 20. Ba3!? Rf7. This was the game continuation. After 21. Rad1?! Rxg3 22.
hg Bxf5 (almost the same position as in the 20. Rd1 variation, except that the
bishop stands worse on a3 than it did on f4) 23. Rf2?! (Adams thinks 23.
Re1+/= is stronger - although it’s hard to understand why he considers White’s
position preferable.) 23... Bg4 24. Re1 Rxf2 25. Kxf2 Nf6! 26. Re7 Nd5 27.
Re8+ Kf7=/+. Now it was Black who was trying to win, although at the end he
blundered and lost.
Instead of 21 Rad1, 21 Kf2! was much stronger (White avoids the doubled
pawns). 21.. Rxg3 22 Kxg3 Bxf5 23 Rf1(+/= or +/-) (White threatens 24 Rxf5)
23.. g6 is forced, and now Black’s game looks suspect
5) 20. Nf1!? Adams evidently did not consider either this move or 20. Bb2,
since neither move was mentioned in the Informant. 20... Bxf1. 20...Re1 21.
Rxd3 Rxf5 22. Rf3 gives White excellent winning chances; for instance,
22...Rxf3 23. gf Ne5 24. Bb2 Nxf3+ 25. Kf2 Rxa1 26. Bxa1, when the extra
piece outweighs the three pawns.
21. Rxd7 Rd3! Black will lose the rook endgame after 21...Re1 22. Bb2 (22.
Rxg7+ Kxg7 23. Bb2+ Kf7 24. Rxe1 Bd3 is weaker) 22... Rfe8 (22...Rxa1? 23.
Rxg7+) 23. Rxg7+ Kf8 24. Rxe1 Rxe1 25. Kf2 Re2+ 26. Kxf1 Rxb2 27. Rxh7
Rxa2 28. Rxc7.
22. Re7! It’s important to control the e2 square. The game is a draw after 22.
Rxc7 Be2 23. Bb2 Rf7 24. Rc8+ Rf8. (See Diagram)
file:///C|/Cafe/Dvoretsky/dvoretsky.htm (2 of 4) [10/11/2000 8:42:09 AM]
The Instructor
Black’s situation is desperate: the bishop is
attacked and has no retreat; in addition,
White threatens 23. Bb2. But the resources
of the defense are not yet exhausted.
5A) 22... Be2? 23. Bb2!+- (but not 23.
Rxe2? Rd1+ 24. Kf2 Rxf5+ 25. Kg3 Rff1,
when the rook must go to c2, and White will
never get out. One important point is that
26. Rf2 Rfe1 27. Ba3? fails to 27...Rd3+!,
and the pawn check gets Black’s king out of
the mating net.)
5B) 22... Rxf5!? 23. Ba3 (23. Bb2? Rd2)
Bxg2; and now, White has two possibilities, both based on the same tactical
resource:
5Ba) 24. Re8+ Kf7 25. Rf8+ Kg6 26. Kxg2! (26. Rxf5 Kxf5 27. Kxg2 Rd2+ =
is inferior) 26...Rd2+ 27. Kh1. Clearly, 27...Rh5? does not work now, in view
of 28. Rg1+ Kh6 29. Rf6+! gf 30. Bf8#. Nor is Black’s position particularly
pleasant after 27...Rxf8 28. Bxf8. Best is 27...Rg5!, for instance: 28. Bb4 Rc2,
or 28. Rff1 (intending 29. Bc1) 28...Rgg2 29. Rg1 Rxg1+ 30. Rxg1+ Kf7+/=.
5Bb) 24. Kxg2!? Rd2+ 25. Kh1! (not 25. Kg3 h5! -unclear) Again, not
25...Rh5? 26. Re8+ Kf7 27. Rf8+ Kg6 (27..Ke6 28. Re1+) 28. Rg1+ Kh6
29.Rf6+!. Nor are Black’s problems solved by 25...h6 26. Bb4! Rc2 27. Rxc7
Rff2 28. Bd6. But 25...c5! 26. Rg1 Rxa2! is possible, and if 27. Rexg7+ Kf8 28.
Bc1, then 28... Rxh2+! 29. Kxh2 Rh5+.
5C) 22... Rd1!? 23. Rxg7+!? Here 23. Bb2 is not convincing: 23...Rfd8 24.
Rxg7+ Kf8 25. Rxd1 Rxd1 26. Kf2 Bd3!? - unclear.
23... Kxg7 24. Bb2+ Kg8! 25. Rxd1 Be2 26. Re1. 26. Rd7 is useless, in view
of 26... Rxf5 threatening 27...Rf1# or 27...Rf7. And 26. Rd2 runs into 26...Bg4
27. Rd7 Rf7! 28. Rd8+ Rf8=, or 27. f6 Kf7+/=.
26... Bg4 (26...Bd3? 27. g4+/-) 27. f6 (27. Re7 Rf7) 27...Rd8+/=.
For those readers interested in this kind of training in calculation, I offer
another, somewhat simpler, example on the same theme. (See Diagram)
Tseshkovsky-Gufeld Vilnius Zonal, 1975
What’s the best way to exploit White’s
great advantage?
In the game, Vitaly Tseshkovsky
incautiously played 35. Rf8+?? Rxf8 36.
b8Q, either overlooking or underestimating
the powerful reply 36...Qf6!, after which the
evaluation of the position changed a
hundred and eighty degrees. After 37. Qxa7
(37. Qxf8+ Qxf8 38. Qc3 Qf5!, followed by
39...Kg8 doesn’t help White) 37... Bd3! 38.
Qd1 Rxe1+, White resigned.
file:///C|/Cafe/Dvoretsky/dvoretsky.htm (3 of 4) [10/11/2000 8:42:09 AM]
The Instructor
Also mistaken is 35. Qg3? Qb6+ 36. Kh1 - Black can force the draw with
36...Bxg2+ 37. Qxg2 (37. Kxg2 Qxb7+) Rxe1; or he can try for the win by
36...Qd4!? 37. Rd1 Qxb2 38. Rf2 Qb5.
Eduard Gufeld suggested 35. Qc3!? Qb6+ (on 35...Qa5, 36. Qd4! is strong) 36.
Rf2 Qc5 37. Qxc5 Rxc5 38. Rxe4. White does have an extra pawn; although
after 38...Rxb7, it is unclear whether he will be able to convert it into a point.
So before putting the queen at c3, it should be established that White has no
other hopeful tries.
35. Qb4! Qb6+ 35...Bxb7 (hoping against hope for 36. Rxe5? Qxf1+! 37. Kxf1
Bxg2+ 38. Kxg2 Rxb4=) loses flatly to 36. Qc3, 36. Qd4 or 36. Rf8+ Kg7 37.
Rxb8.
On 35...Kg8 36. Rxe4 Rxe4 37. Qxe4 Qxb7 38. Qe6+ Kh8 39. Qe5+ Kg8 40.
b3, we have almost the same situation as in the 35. Qc3 variation, with an extra
pawn for White - but with queens still on the board. The presence of queens is
obviously in White’s favor, since his king still has pawn cover, while Black’s
doesn’t.
36. Qxb6 ab 37. Rf4 Rxb7 38. Rxe4
In comparison with the 35. Qc3 variation, here the Black pawn has gone from
a7 to b6, which must favor White. Here, his position is almost certainly won.
Translated by Jim Marfia
Copyright 2000 Mark Dvoretsky. All rights reserved.
[The Chess Cafe Home Page] [Book Reviews] [Bulletin Board] [Columnists]
[Endgame Studies] [The Ninth File] [The Skittles Room] [Archives]
[Links] [Online Bookstore] [About The Chess Cafe] [Contact Us]
Copyright 2000 CyberCafes, LLC. All Rights Reserved.
"The Chess Cafe®" is a registered trademark of Russell Enterprises, Inc.
file:///C|/Cafe/Dvoretsky/dvoretsky.htm (4 of 4) [10/11/2000 8:42:09 AM]
The Instructor
Battle of the Heavy Pieces
Schlechter-Lasker
5th Match Game
Vienna/Berlin 1910
The classic game we now present for your inspection has already been reprinted
many times. I would like to compare the annotators’ opinions (some quite
radically different), and add some analysis of my own.
But the point is not just the correction of errors in analysis. What I value most
of all, in examining other people’s analysis, is that they are able to present an
The
overall picture of the struggle, and to describe the problems (some purely
chess-related, others psychological) facing the players. Variations are chiefly
Instructor
required in order to demonstrate or to illustrate the author’s point of view.
This was precisely the approach used by the famous Russian player and trainer,
Mark Dvoretsky
Pyotr Romanovsky, when commenting on this game for his book, "Middlegame
- Positional Play" - a work which, although it has indeed been translated into
English, has somehow escaped the notice of the entire English-speaking world.
So it will be mostly Romanovsky’s conclusions I shall cite here - even though I
may have to disagree with some of them.
The game’s opening stage is not very interesting, so we’ll hurry past it:
1. e4 e5 2. Nf3 Nc6 3. Bb5 Nf6 4. 0-0 d6 5. d4 Bd7 6. Nc3 Be7 7. Bg5 0-0 8.
de
8. Bxc6 Bxc6 9. de de (9... Nxe4 10. Nxe4 Bxe4 11. Bxe7 Qxe7 12. ed Qxd6
13. Qxd6 cd 14. Nd4+/= - Schlechter) 10. Qxd8 Bxd8 11. Nxe5 Bxe4 12.
Bxf6?! Bxf6 13. Nd7 Bxc3 14. Nxf8 Bxb2 15. Rab1 Ba3 (unclear - Keres) 16.
Nd7 f6!?-/+.
8. ... Nxe5
8. .. de 9. Re1 intending Bxc6 (Schlechter)
9. Bxd7
9. Nxe5 Bxb5 10. Nxf7? Qd7 (Schlechter)
9. ... Nfxd7 10. Bxe7 Nxf3+
10... Qxe7 11. Nd4 intending f4 (Schlechter)
11. Qxf3 Qxe7 12. Nd5 Qd8 13. Rad1
Better 13. Qc3 - Schlechter
file:///C|/Cafe/Dvoretsky/dvoretsky.htm (1 of 7) [11/4/2000 5:16:15 PM]
The Instructor
13. ... Re8 14. Rfe1 Nb6 15. Qc3 Nxd5 16. Rxd5
16. ed leads to too much simplification (Schlechter)
16. ... Re6 = (See Diagram)
17. Rd3 Qe7 18. Rg3 Rg6
18... f5? 19. Qb3 - Schlechter
19. R1e3 Re8 20. h3 Kf8 21. Rxg6 hg
"Can we aver that either side has any
advantage here? Of course not. In fact,
many players would be willing to shake
hands and take a draw at this point.
The position teeters on the verge of an
endgame - and this line remains uncrossed
for many moves." (Romanovsky)
Here it should be noted that, in the above-cited book, Romanovsky spends a
great deal of time examining positions with only rooks and queens on the
board, even going so far as to label these positions "the fourth stage of a chess
game". These positions feature both endgame and middlegame tendencies; their
chief difficulty lies in deciding which features are currently the more
significant. Should one centralize the king (as in an endgame), or shelter it (as
in the middlegame); should one create pawn weaknesses for an attack that may
never happen, and so on.
The game under discussion is an excellent illustration of this problem. Lasker
treated the position as an endgame, gradually outplaying his opponent; but at
the very end, he briefly lost his concentration, and fell under a mating attack.
22. Qb4 c6
"22... b6 would have led to a serious queenside weakening after 23. Qa4 a5 24.
Qc6." (Tarrasch)
23. Qa3 a6 24. Qb3 Rd8 25. c4
"From an endgame standpoint, the c-pawn would have been better left at c2.
The weakness of Black’s d6-pawn proves illusory." (Romanovsky)
25. ... Rd7 26. Qd1 Qe5 27. Qg4 Ke8
"Using rear lines of communication, Lasker carefully moves his king closer to
the center and the queenside. In the endgame, of course, the king is better
placed near the main group of his pawns, which is the only spot from which an
attack may be launched. Meanwhile, Black also undertakes a plan of stirring up
queenside play. This also resolves another issue: giving the king the
responsibility for the defense of the pawn at d6 frees the queen from this task.
On g8 or f8, of course, the king stands more securely than it does at c7 -
although here, too, it is hard to get at him. There aren’t a lot of pieces
remaining on the board, and Black’s queenside pawn chain is quite sturdy."
(Romanovsky)
file:///C|/Cafe/Dvoretsky/dvoretsky.htm (2 of 7) [11/4/2000 5:16:15 PM]
The Instructor
28. Qe2 Kd8 29. Qd2 Kc7 30. a3 Re7 31. b4 (See Diagram)
31. ... b5!
"Very boldly and energetically played - as
one should expect from a great master.
Although this move does open up the king’s
position, at the same time, the White
a-pawn is rendered backward. And Black
hopes, at some point, to create a passed
pawn of his own, by advancing the c-pawn."
(Tarrasch)
"Black aims for a position in which the
trade of queens will favor him. This allows
him greater freedom of action, since White
will have to avoid an endgame. The bad side of this move is that the king’s
pawn cover will be somewhat loosened. But it’s still a long way to the endgame
- that is, if Black can reach one." (Romanovsky)
Before defining the pawn structure on the queenside, it would have been
advisable to have first improved his position on the kingside, by ..g6-g5, ..f7-f6,
and perhaps ..Re8. However, White would have responded to 31..g5 with 32.
Qd1, followed by 33. a4.
32. cb
Evidently, Schlechter has decided to show his powerful opponent that there is
still a middlegame on the board. However, White must be careful as well. In
view of the weak pawn at a3 and the possibility of ..c6-c5, the rook endgame is
quite unacceptable for him." (Romanovsky)
32. Qd3? Qa1+ 33 Kh2 Qa2! (33..Qc1? 34 cb ab 35. Qd4 - Dvoretsky) 34. c5
dc 35. bc Rd7 36. Qc3 Qd2! 37. Qe5+ Kb7-/+ (Romanovsky).
But this evaluation is wrong. White continues 38. Qxg7 (taking the pawn
without playing Qe5+ first is even more exact) 38... Qxf2 39. Rf3 Qxc5
(39..Qa2 40. Qc3!? or 40. Rf6!?) 40. Rxf7 Rxf7 41. Qxf7+ Kb6 42. Qf6!?, and
White at least stands no worse. Instead of 32...Qa1+, a stronger move is 32...
f6=/+.
32. ... ab 33. g3 g5! 34. Kg2 Re8 35. Qd1!
(Intending 36. a4) 35. Qa2?! Qe6 Romanovsky.
35. ... f6!
35... Ra8 36. Qh5, with counterplay (Tarrasch).
36. Qb3?
White could not bring himself to play 36. a4!?, in view of 36... ba 37. Qxa4
Kb7, when 38. Ra3 results in a hard rook endgame for him after 38... Qxe4+
39. Kh2 Qd4! 40. Qa6+ Kc7 41. Qa7+ Qxa7 42. Rxa7+ Kb6 43. Rxg7 Re4
(Romanovsky). This variation shows the point of the fine prophylactic move
35... f6! However, the sacrifice of the e4-pawn was hardly necessary; with
file:///C|/Cafe/Dvoretsky/dvoretsky.htm (3 of 7) [11/4/2000 5:16:15 PM]
The Instructor
something like, say, 38. Qc2!?, White maintains good counterchances.
The text has no point, and only loses time for White. Viorel Bologan’s
suggested 36. Qh5! was stronger, preventing Black’s plan of Qe6 and Rh8, and
preparing to exchange the h-pawn if the occasion presents itself.
36. ... Qe6 37. Qd1 Rh8 38. g4 (See Diagram)
"White again weakens his position, refusing
- quite rightly - to play 38. Qg4. Anything
but an endgame!" (Romanovsky)
38. ... Qc4
A self-confident queen invasion. Black
should undoubtedly have preferred 38...Ra8,
to quash forever White’s chief - in fact,
probably only - counterchance: the advance
of the a-pawn. But perhaps Lasker, seeing
no clear way to strengthen his own position,
decided to provoke Schlechter into this
bayonet attack, banking on he fact that it
requires a pawn sacrifice." (Romanovsky)
And indeed, after 38...Ra8 39. Qc2, how is Black to strengthen his position? I
think that Lasker played the best move.
39. a4!?
"White might never get another chance. Black will soon discover that
defending an exposed king, even against a comparatively small number of
pieces, is no easy task." (Romanovsky)
"A pawn sacrifice rich with opportunity: after 39. Qf3 Re8 40. Qf5 Re5 (40...
Qf7 - Dvoretsky) 41. Qh7 Qf7 or 41. Qg6 Qg8, White has a difficult game."
(Schlechter)
Tarrasch maintained the opposite opinion:
"White begins to panic at the implacable improvement of his opponent’s
position, and bets everything on one card, sacrificing a pawn for attacking
chances. This continuation should have cost him the game, even if it did give
him some chances. There were as yet no grounds for despair: all his weak spots
(at a3, e4 and h3) were quite sufficiently defended by the rook; and as long as
he avoided the exchange of queens, he might have continued play with a clear
conscience."
Tarrasch is quite obviously right: a strategy of passive defense was quite
appropriate in these circumstances. Continue: 39. Qe1 Re8 40. Kg1, and I can
find no clear way to strengthen Black’s position. Any further pawn advance
will lead to the creation of weaknesses in his own camp.
In any event, if White had to play a3-a4, then it should have been done earlier,
on move 36, when it would not have required a pawn sacrifice.
39. ... Qxb4?
file:///C|/Cafe/Dvoretsky/dvoretsky.htm (4 of 7) [11/4/2000 5:16:15 PM]
The Instructor
"No worse is 39...Ra8 40. ab Qxb5 41. Qb3 Ra1! 42. Rd3 Kb6, and if 43. Rxd6
(43. Qc3 Qe5! 44. Rd4 Rd1, or 44. Qxe5 de 45. Rd7 Ra7! - Dvoretsky), then
43... Qf1+ 44. Kg3 Qg1+, and wins. Lasker, however, hastens to win material,
since there is no immediately visible threat to his king." (Romanovsky)
41. Qb3? in Romanovsky’s line is a bad choice, allowing counterthreats to the
White king. One might suggest 41. Rc3! instead, for example, preparing 42.
Qd5 or 42. Qb3 (41... Qxb4 42. Rxc6+).
The strongest move, however, was one that went unnoticed by the
commentators: 39... Rb8!-/+, bringing the rook in with an attack on the weak
pawn at b4.
Taking the pawn at once allows White to create dangerous counterthreats.
40. ab Qxb5 41. Rb3 Qa6 (See Diagram)
42. Qd4?
Intending Qb4 and Ra3.
But Schlechter missed the strongest line,
again pointed out by Bologan: 42. Rb4!,
with the plan of 43. Qb3 or 43. Ra4 (43.
Rb1 or b2 are apparently equivalent). For
instance, on 42... c5 43. Ra4 Qb7 44. Qa1
Kb8 42. Qa2! Re8 46. f3, White has the
extremely unpleasant threat 47. Ra3. Black
would apparently have to repeat moves with
42... Qa3 43. Rb3 Qa6 44. Rb4.
42. ... Re8!
An excellent maneuver which Schlechter apparently underestimated. From e5,
the rook will assist with the defense and simultaneously create counterthreats
against the e-pawn.
43. Rb1 Re5 44. Qb4 Qb5
44... Rb5 45. Qc4
45. Qe1 Qd3 46. Rb4
Intending 47. Qa1 (See Diagram)
file:///C|/Cafe/Dvoretsky/dvoretsky.htm (5 of 7) [11/4/2000 5:16:15 PM]
The Instructor
46. ... c5?!
46... Rb5 (Capablanca) 47. Ra4 Rb1 48.
Qa5+ Kd7 49. Qf5+ (Romanovsky).
46... Ra5! (intending Ra3) 47. Rb3 Qxb3
48. Qxa5+ Kb7 (48..Qb6 - Schlechter) 49.
Qd8 Qe6 50. f3 d5 51. ed cd 52. Qa5 Qd7
53. Qb4+ Kc7 54. Qd4. "The queen
endgame is certainly not simple, and it is
not clear whether Black could win it. Lasker
was unsure of this; and since he quite
underestimated White’s chances, he decided
that he was within his rights to try for
more." (Romanovsky)
47. Ra4 c4 48. Qa1 Qxe4+ 49. Kh2
Black has won a second pawn, but the open position of his king assures his
opponent sufficient counterplay.
49. ... Rb5 (intending Qe5+) 50. Qa2 (intending Rxc4+ or Ra7+) 50. ... Qe5+
50... Rb3?? 51. Qxb3 Qf4+ 52. Qg3+- (Schlechter).
51. Kg1 Qe1+ 52. Kh2?!
Better 52. Kg2 - Romanovsky.
52. ... d5 53. Ra8
Intending 54. Qa7+; if 53. Ra7+ Rb7.
53. ... Qb4
Black only gets a repetition of moves after 53... Qe5+ 54. Kg1 (54 Kg2 Qe4+
55. f3? Qd4-+ - Capablanca).
54. Kg2 (54. Qa6? Qd6+) (See Diagram)
54. ... Qc5?
On Lasker’s suggested 54... Rb8 there
follows 55. Qa7+ Rb7 56. Qe3 Qd6, and
now not 57. Qe8 (hoping for 57..Qd7? 58
Qf8! threatening 59. Qc5+), in view of 57...
d4!, threatening to exchange queens
(Dvoretsky), but 57. Rg8 (or 57 Re8) 57...
d4 58 Qe4, maintaining a dangerous attack
(Schlechter).
Schlechter suggested 54... Rb7!?
Vadim Zvjagintsev offered the most solid
solution: 54... c3!? - White must reckon with the possible queen check at e4.
The most likely outcome here would be a draw after, for instance, 55. Re8 Rb8
56. Qa7+ Rb7 57. Qa8 Rb8 58. Qa7+.
file:///C|/Cafe/Dvoretsky/dvoretsky.htm (6 of 7) [11/4/2000 5:16:15 PM]
