Chess Informant - Article 39

Highlights from the Anthology of Chess Combinations

Zdenko Krnic
Editor-in-Chief

The third edition of the Anthology of Chess Combinations will be available by the end of August, and the new edition features several major changes introduced by the Chess Informant Editorial Board. The main one being that it has been divided into two main parts: educative and practical examples. As a foundation for the first part, the previous edition of the Anthology has been used with our original classification keys pertaining to fundamental tactical motifs. All the material inherited from the previous edition underwent rigorous re-examination by critically-minded experts from the Editorial Board armed with top-level computer engines to ensure the high-quality of the examples.

The second part has been produced to incorporate the elements of a workbook with some of the more recent examples divided into three groups to maintain a clear-cut structure. Each group has three levels of difficulty without any classification keys, thereby prohibiting the prospective solver from benefiting from any hints. Our editors also opted to omit a number of old examples for newer, more challenging brain teasers.

The big names are included, of course, but even more interesting are their annotations to the games, as they produce an excellent testimony to the depth of some extraordinary ideas that could otherwise have been left unnoticed. We hope that the third edition of the Anthology of Chess Combinations will help readers develop a greater appreciation for the art of combinative chess and a fundamental understanding of how it can be achieved. I have chosen four examples from the rich treasury of material, which will confirm that the efforts of the Chess Informant Editors will receive a positive response from the readers.

The position below could have appeared in the 23rd game of the Karpov – Kasparov match in 1986. After an extraordinary queen sacrifice, I. Zaitsev, Karpov’s trainer at the time, showed that upon 8. Rh7 the best possibility for Black would be to find salvation in a weaker ending with two knights vs. the bishop pair.

Karpov – Kasparov
London/Leningrad (m/23) 1986 — 42/39*

1. Qe6!! Ke6 [1... Kf8 2. Bd5 and White is winning; I. Zaitsev] 2. Bd5 Kf5 3. Rf3 Kg4 [3... Kg5 4. Bc1 Kh5 5. Rf4 Bf6 (5... g5 6. Bf7 Kh6 7. Rh4 mate) 6. Rh4 Bh4 7. Bf3 mate; I. Zaitsev] 4. Rf4 Kg5 [4... Kh5 5. Rh4 Kg5 6. f4 Kf5 7. e4 mate; I. Zaitsev] 5. Bg7 [with the idea 6. h4 Kh5 7. Bf3 mate; 5. Bc1?? Bb2 and Black is winning] Ne5 6. Rh4 [with the idea 7. Bh6 Kf6 8. Rf4 mate, 7. f4 Kf5 8. e4 mate] Ne3! 7. Be6 Rf8 8. Rh7 [with the idea h4 mate] Chess is a magical game and this was confirmed when I found a unique defense for Black: 8…Ng2!! [8... Nf5 9. f4 Kg4 10. Rh4 mate; 8... Rf4 9. h4 Rh4 10. Rh4 Qf8 11. f4 Qf4 12. gf4 Kh4 13. Bc8 and White is superior; I. Zaitsev] 9. Kg2 Rf2! 10. Kf2 Ng4 11. Kg1 Nh2 12. Kh2 Black’s great sacrifice of material has destroyed White’s dangerous f- and h-pawns, and now White has to find out how to hold a draw. The idea is 13.Rh4 as Black cannot stop Rg4-h4 with perpetual check. 12... Rc5 13. Rh4 Rf5 Black covered the h3-c8 diagonal, but after 14. Kh3 perpetual check is unavoidable. [Z. Krnic]

I first met Vladimir Kramnik at the Dortmund tournament in 1992. With his brilliant performance in the Open tournament and subsequent meteoric rise, he announced his entrance into the elite of world chess. During that same year he won the tournament in Chalkidiki ahead of Lautier. Their individual game was published in Informant 55/23 with annotations by Kramnik. After many adventures, the game ended in a draw, but he estimated the position below as winning for Black. Now IM Sasa Velickovic has shown that White can force a perpetual check with 4. Nd5.

Lautier – Kramnik
Chalkidiki 1992 — 55/23

1... de2! 2. Ne3 Qf3 3. Re5 Rd8! [3... Qf1?? 4. Rg1 Qf2 5. Qe1 and White is winning; Lautier – Kramnik] 4. Nd5! [4. h4 Qh3 5. Kg1 Rd1 6. Kf2 e1Q 7. Qe1 Qh4 and Black is winning; 4. Rd5 Re8! (4... Qf1 5. Rg1 Qf3 6. Rg2 Qf1 equal) 5. Qe1 Qe3 6. Rdg5 Rc8! 7. R5g3 Qe4! and Black is winning, with the idea Rc1 Kramnik] Qf1 [4... Rc8 5. Qf4 Qd5 6. h3 Rc1 7. Qc1 Qe5 8. Qe1] 5. Rg1 Qf3 equal [Sa. Velickovic]

We can immediately recognize the position below as arising from the Sicilian Dragon. The game was annotated for Informant by grandmaster Rowson, who mentioned only 21. f4 Kh7 with winning position for Black. Yet, while working on the manuscript for Informant 84, IM Ivan Markovic, an expert in the Dragon Variation, felt that some good attacking possibilities for White were hidden in the position. After 1. Rg6! Kh7 2. Rg5 Kh6 3. Qd2 e6 we reach a critical position where he shows that 4. Rh5 leads to equality, while 4. Ne2 leads to a superior position for White. In rechecking this example for the new edition of the Anthology of Chess Combinations, he found a brilliant winning combination for White. Namely, 4. Nf5! ef5 5. Rf5 Kg6 6. Rg5 Kh6 and from the following analyses we can see that the position is hopeless for Black.

Rowson – j. Shahade
Reykjavik 2002 — 84/183*

1. Rg6! Kh7 [1... fg6?? 2. Nf6 mate] 2. Rg5 Kh6 3. Qd2 e6 4. Nf5! [4. Rh5 Kh5 5. Nf4 (5. Nf5? ef5 6. Nf6 Kh4 7. Qh6 Kg3 8. Nh5 Kg2 9. Qd2 Kh3 and Black is winning, with the idea Be5) Kh4 6. Ng2 (6. e5!? Rg8 7. Qf2 Kg5 8. Qe3 Kh4 9. Qf2 equal) Kg3 (6... Kh5?? 7. Nf5!! and White is winning) 7. Ne1 Rg8 8. Ne2 Kh3 (8... Kf2 9. Nd3 Kg2 10. Nd4 Kh1 11. Nf2 Kg1 12. Nh3 Kh1 equal) 9. Qh6 Qh4 10. Nf4 Kg3 11. Ne2 Kh3 equal; 4. Ne2!? ed5 5. Rd5 Kg7 6. Rg5 Kh7 (6... Kf8? 7. Qd6 Re7 8. Qh6 Bg7 9. Rg7 and White is winning) 7. Rh5 Kg8 8. Qh6 (8. Rh8!? Kh8 9. Qh6 Kg8 10. Qg6 Kh8 11. Qh5! Kg7 12. Qf7 Kh8 13. Nf4 Re6 only move 14. Ne6 Be6 15. Qe6 Rc7 and White is superior) Bg7 9. Rg5 Qg5 10. Qg5 and White is superior] ef5 5. Rf5! Kg6 [5... Kg7 6. Rh5 Re6 7. Qd4 Rf6 (7... f6? 8. Qg1 Kf7 9. Rh7) 8. Rh8! Kh8 9. Nf6 and White is winning] 6. Rg5 Kh6

7. Ne7!! Qe7 8. Bf7! Kh7 [8... Qf7? 9. Rh5! and White is winning; 8... Nf4 9. Qf4 Kh7 10. e5!! d5 only move 11. Rh5 (11. Bd5 Qg5 only move 12. hg5 with attack) Kg7 12. Bd5 Rc6 only move (12... Be6 13. Qg3 Kf7 14. Rh7) 13. Rg5! Rg6 (13... Qg5 14. Qf7! Kh6 15. hg5 Kg5 16. f4! Kh4 17. Qd7) 14. Rg6 Kg6 15. h5! Kh5 only move (15... Kg7 16. Qg3; 15... Kh7 16. Qe4) 16. Bf7 Qf7 17. Qf7 Kh6 18. Qd7 Re5 19. c4 and White is winning] 9. Rh5 Kg7 10. Be8 Qe8 [10... Kg8 11. Bd7 Rc5 12. Qh6 Bg7 (12... Rh5 13. Be6!) 13. Be6 Kf8 14. Qf4 Ke8 (14... Bf6 15. Rh8 Kg7 16. Qh6 mate) 15. Rc5 dc5 16. Qb8 Qd8 17. Bf7 Ke7 18. Qb7 Kf8 19. Bd5 and White is winning] 11. Qg5 Qg6 12. Qe7 Kg8 13. Rg5 Qg5 14. hg5 Bh3 15. f4 and White is winning [Iv. Markovic]

This is a critical moment from a game played at the Aeroflot tournament last year. In the annotations, published in Informant 90/86, grandmaster Magomedov estimates that the position is winning for White after 3. Rd3. However, Chess Informant Editor IM Sasa Velickovic gives a detailed analysis proving that instead of 5… Bd7?? Black could defend his position by playing 5… Kf7, etc.

Vescovi – Miton
Moscow 2004 — 90/86

1. Be5!! [1. Ng6 Kf7 2. Nh8 Rh8 with compensation; Magomedov] fe5 [1... Rh6 2. Bf4! g5 3. Qf3!; 1... Bf7 2. Rd7! a5 (2... Re8 3. Bd6 Kg8 4. Bc5 Qc5 5. Ra7) 3. Qf3 Re8 4. Bf6 Qf2 (4... gf6 5. Qf6 Rh7 6. Rf7 Rf7 7. Ng6 Qg6 8. Qg6) 5. Qf2 Bf2 6. Rf2 Re1 7. Rf1 Rf1 8. Kf1 gf6 9. Rb7 Magomedov] 2. Qf3 Ke7 3. Rd3! Rhd8 [3... Raf8? 4. Ng6 (4. Qb7?! Ke8 5. Qc6 Kf7 6. Rf3 Ke7) Ke8 5. Qc6 Kf7 6. Ne5 Kf6 7. b4! and White is winning] 4. Ng6 Ke8 5. Qc6 Kf7 [5... Bd7?? 6. Qd5 Bf8 7. Ne5 1 : 0 Vescovi – Miton] 6. Ne5 Kf6 [6... Ke7 a) 7. Qb7 Kf6 (7... Ke8?? 8. Qe4! and White is winning) 8. Qf3 Bf5 9. g4!! hg4 10. Ng4 Kg5 11. h4 Kg6 12. Ne5 Kf6 13. Ng4 equal; b) 7. Qc7 Ke8 (7... Kf6?? 8. Rf3 Bf5 9. Qf7 Ke5 10. Rf5! Qf5 11. Re1 Qe4 12. Qg7 and White is winning) 8. Qc6 Ke7 equal] 7. Rf3 Ke7 [7... Ke5?? 8. Re1 Kd4 9. Qe6 and White is winning] 8. Re1 [8. Qb7!? Ke8 9. Re1 (9. Qc6 Ke7 equal) Rac8 10. Nc6! (10. Qg7 Rd1 11. Qh8 Ke7 12. Qf6 Kd6 13. Nc4 Kc7 14. Qe6 Bb4 15. Rfe3 Be1 16. Re1 Rcd8) Qe2 11. Re3 Qe3 12. fe3 Bd5 13. Qg7 (13. Nd8 Bb7 14. Nb7 Ba3) Rc6 14. Qe5 Be6 15. Qh5 Bf7 16. Qh8 Bf8 17. Qe5 Be7 18. Qb5 Rdd6! (18... Rdc8 19. Rc1 Bd5 20. b4) 19. Rc1 (19. e4 Kf8 with compensation) Bd5 20. Rd1 Bc4 21. Qh5 Bf7 22. Rd6 Rd6 with compensation] Rd1 [8... Rac8?? 9. Rf7! Bf7 10. Ng6 mate] 9. Rf7 [9. Qb7 equal; 9. Qc7 equal] Bf7 10. Qb7 Ke8 11. Qa8 Ke7 12. Qa7 Ke8 13. Qf7 Kd8 14. Nc6 Kc8 15. Ne7 Kc7 16. Nd5 Kc6 17. Qe8 Kb7 18. Qd7 Kb8 19. Qc7 Ka8 20. Qc8 Ka7 equal [Sa. Velickovic]