Russia: the turning of the tide

As Ukraine gears up for its long-awaited counter-offensive against Putin’s illegal invasion, and in the light of President Zelensky’s visits to Rishi Sunak and other world leaders, my thoughts have turned to that crucial moment when the Soviet chess imperium began to display cracks.

I remind readers that FIDÉ, the governing body of world chess, still has a pro-Putin Russian President in charge — unlike almost any other international organisation.

The Soviet chess empire was, whatever one thought of USSR politics, the mightiest engine for support of chess which the world had ever seen, or is likely to see. From 1948 onwards the world championship was held by the Soviet citizens Botvinnik, Smyslov, Tal, Petrosian, Spassky , Karpov and Kasparov, with just one fleeting break for Bobby Fischer. From 1951 to 1969 all world championships were staged in Moscow, while tournaments, training and the technology of the day were all enlisted as part of a giant machine which ultimately mowed down everything in its path.

By “technology” I mean the Soviet analysis and research mill, which was recorded in their various publications in the largely hermetic Russian language expressed in alien-looking Cyrillic characters. Victories by westerners against Soviet champions were few and far between and it was clear that a gulf existed between Soviet professional expertise and western amateurism.

However, as the 1970s dawned, all this began to change. The Primum Mobile was of course the eccentric lone genius Bobby Fischer, who defeated Boris Spassky in 1972. This demonstrated that the Soviets were not invincible. Sadly, the Fischer effect was rendered transient by his refusal to defend his title or even play chess at all, a severe dereliction of duty to all his enthusiastic fans.

Other factors, perhaps more important and long lasting in their effects, were the insistence on research, instigated in the UK by Bob Wade IM OBE, whose Batsford series began to rival the Soviets in depth investigation. A further plus was that the Batsford books were comparatively easy to read.  Although initially published in outmoded English Descriptive Notation, this was not nearly as hard to decipher as texts published in Cyrillic.

Even more significantly, western innovations in computer and communications technology, telex, fax, and ultimately the Internet and email, began to expose the sclerotic nature of Soviet communications. In a politically oppressive state, suppression of political views also harms the free flow of scientific and research information. By the mid-1980s Soviet Grandmasters were losing games, precisely because they did not have access to the latest informational breakthroughs.

During the 1986 world championship, split between London and Leningrad (now St Petersburg), Soviet organisers had to rely on the one Communist Party-approved photocopier located at Party HQ to disseminate the championship moves. In contrast, the London leg had been broadcasting the moves worldwide by fax (itself now largely obsolete, but very exciting at the time) within minutes of the end of each game. And not just the moves, but diagrams for key positions adorned by Grandmaster commentary.

Finally, western Grandmasters began to try harder, to professionalise, and to use psychology. Jonathan Speelman, for example, became an expert in Russian, Dr John Nunn metamorphosed into an equally formidable expert in sharp opening systems, while my strategy, as in the following game against the then World Champion, Karpov, was to adopt highly unusual but viable openings where Soviet know-how could not easily prevail. I like to see this game and its offbeat opening line as a kind of precursor of the successful use by Tony Miles three years later of that rarissima avis 1. e4 a6!?

 

Anatoly Karpov vs. Raymond Keene

Bad Lauterberg (1977), ½-½

Notes by Keene

1.e4 e5

One of the very few occasions on which I have played 1…e5 in a serious tournament. The reason for this was that my study of Karpov’s games revealed that, if he had any weaknesses, it was a slight hesitancy against “Romantic” openings. It also seemed from my research that Karpov had never faced the Larsen Variation during his tournament career. So I spent the morning prior to our game examining the analysis of it given in Tim Harding’s excellent monograph on Philidor’s Defence.

2. Nf3 d6 3. d4 exd4 4. Nxd4

Morphy liked 4 Qxd4.

4…g6

The key move of Larsen’s line.

5. Nc3 Bg7 6. Be2?! 

Not the most aggressive course, which consists of 6 Be3, followed by Qd2 and O-O-O. After Karpov’s move I already began to feel that my choice of opening had been a qualified success.

6…Nc6 7. Be3 Nf6 8. O-O O-O 9. Re1 Re8

Employing the Nimzowitschian strategy of restraint against White’s e-pawn.

10. Nxc6 bxc6 11. Bf3 Nd7 12. Qd2 Ba6 13. Rad1 Qb8

 

Black has achieved a highly satisfactory position from the opening, but that does not say so much when playing Karpov. The then World Champion excelled in spotting microscopic potential advantages, and, in addition, his reactions were extremely swift, which meant that he could keep up constant, rapid pressure on his opponent for long periods. In fact, although we played 57 moves in our game, they were all completed in the first session of five hours. In such cases physical health often contributes as large a part as chess strength to the final result.

14. b3 Qb4 15. Nb1 Qxd2 16. Bxd2 Re7 17. Ba5 Ne5?!

A superior way of defending c7 is 17…Nb6, followed by …Rae8, in order to tie White’s king’s bishop to the defence of the e-pawn.

18. Be2 Bxe2 19. Rxe2 Rae8 20. Kf1 c5 21. Bc3 Nc6 22. Bxg7 Kxg7 23. Nc3 Nd4 24. Red2 f5?! 

Possibly too impatient. Although this liquidates White’s e-pawn it also helps White in the eventual creation of a kingside pawn majority.

25. exf5 Nxf5 26. Re2 Rxe2 27. Nxe2 Kf7 28. Rd3 Rb8 29. g4 Ng7 30. Rf3+ Kg8 31. Nf4 c6 32. h4 Rb4?

 

The plan was to force c2-c4, so that eventually …d6-d5 will give Black a passed pawn. After the game Fridrik Olafsson criticised my idea as “too systematic”, recommending the superior 32…Re8!

33. c4 Rb7

Now Black has a difficult defensive task ahead, and I was also running into time-trouble. Meanwhile Karpov was still moving at top speed.

34. Rd3 Rd7 35. Kg2 Kf7 36. Rf3 Kg8 37. Kg3 Re7 38. Rd3 Rd7 39. Ne2 Ne6 40. f4 Kf7

Made it to the first time control, but Karpov still had plenty of time in hand.

41. Nc3 Ke7 42. Re3 Kf7 43. f5

The long-expected passed pawn materialises.

43… gxf5 44. gxf5 Ng7 45. Kf4 Nh5+ 46. Kg5 Nf6 47. Re6 h6+! 48. Kf4

White is temporarily repulsed. If 48. Kxh6 Rd8 49. Kg5 Rg8+ 50. Kf4 Rg4+ 51. Ke3 Rxh4 52. Rxd6 Rh3+ 53. Kd2 Rxc3 54. Rxf6+ Kxf6 55. Kxc3 Ke5 and Black can hold the king and pawn ending

.48…d5!?

Activity at last.

49.cxd5?

Considering his huge time advantage Karpov should possibly have sealed his move here, to make sure of victory the following day. Instead he carried on playing, almost without pause for thought. Much stronger is 49. Rxc6! dxc4 50. Rxc5 cxb3 51. axb3 when it’s an open question whether Black can resist after 51…Rd3!

49… cxd5

Here I was in time-trouble again.

50. Nb5 d4! 51. Nd6+ Kg7 52. Ke5 d3!

 

The saving resource, sacrificing a piece.

53. Rxf6 d2 54. Rg6+ Kf8!

Not 54…Kh7? 55. Rg1 Re7+ 56. Kf6 Re1 57. Rg7+ Kh8 58. Nf7 mate.

55. Rg1 Re7+

Was this what Karpov overlooked on move 49?

56. Kf6 Re1 57. Rg7! ½-½

57…d1=Q 58 Rf7+ Kg8 59 Rg7+ etc. is perpetual check. Apropos Karpov’s speed of play I quote Tony Miles in the New Statesman of 1st April 1977: “One of the most striking features of Karpov’s play is the speed at which he plays in relatively simple technical positions. Against Ray Keene he played a 57-move game in 1 1/2 hours whilst his opponent survived two time scrambles in one session, taking 3 1/2 hours. Against Olafsson the difference was even greater. After two sessions of play the times were Karpov 2 hours, Olafsson 5. I do not know the times at the end of the game, but in all probability the difference was even greater — perhaps a record for modern chess?”

 

Anatoly Karpov vs Tony Miles

7^th European Team Championships (1980), 0-1

Notes by Miles, edited by Keene

 

1. e4  a6!

After a few moments’ hesitation. I watched Karpov’s face as he returned to the board: there was no reaction at all. The audience, though, was another matter. Conditions for spectators were not wonderful, so at first only a few noticed, but after some nudging and pointing a general hushed sniggering broke out. Mutters of “I thought the Skara Schools Championship was not until next week…” I tried to look serious. Miles is the only grandmaster to have espoused this weird defence in a serious game. This extraordinary move is hardly ever played since it does little to challenge White’s domination of the centre. Miles chose it primarily to sidestep the then world champion’s superior knowledge of opening theory.

2. d4

If White is prepared to admit taking this opening seriously than 2. c4 comes into consideration.

2… b5

Several atrocities have also been committed at this point. Whilst they may find their way into the general heading of 1…a6 they certainly do not qualify as the “Birmingham Defence”. However, since this is supposed to be a theoretical analysis, a brief survey: (a) For historical interest 2…d5? 3. exd5 Qxd5 4. Nc3 Qa5 5. Nf3 e6 6. Bd3 c6 (it would seem more consistent to allow the queen to retreat via b6 to a7) 7 O-O ± Rubinstein-Gunsberg, St. Petersburg 1914. (b) 2…g6 3. g3 d5!? 4. Nc3 dxe4 5. Nxe4 Bg7 6. Be3 Nc6 7. c3 e5 8. d5 Nce7 with an excellent position for Black (a distinct improvement on Gunsberg’s play). Patterson + Williams – Keene + Eales, consultation game 1969, continued 9. d6 Nf5 10. Bc5 cxd6 11. Nxd6+ Nxd6 12. Bxd6 Ne7 13. Qa4+? Bd7 14. Qa3 Bc6 15. f3 Nf5 16. O-O-0 Bh6+ 17. Kb1 Bf8 18. c4 Nxd6 19. c5 Ne4! 20. Rxd8+ Rxd8 21. Nh3 Bxc5 22. b4 Be7 23. Bg2 Rd4 0-1. (c) Several games have continued with 2…d6 or 2…g6 leading to a Modern Defence, where 1…a6 has little more than psychological value. One of slight independent value: 2…d6 3. f4 g6 4. Nf3 Bg7 5. c3 d5 6. e5 h5 7. Qb3 Nh6 8. c4?! dxc4 9. Bxc4 b5 10. Bd5 c6 11. Be4 Be6 12. Qc2 Nf5 with a good position, Bellin-Keene, Norwich 1969. Oddly enough, when I consulted the relevant reference works after the game to discover the official refutation, I could discover no lines that conferred a tangible White advantage. The game Rubinstein-Gunsberg, St. Petersburg 1914, continued instead 2…d5 3. exd5 Qxd5 4. Nc3 Qa5 5. Nf3 e6 6. Bd3 c6 7 O-O with evidently better chances for White. The Miles strategem of expanding on the queenside is considerably more rational.

3. Nf3

As far as I know, the only person to play 1…a6 (or 1. d4 b5 2. e4 a6) with the same idea as myself is Michael Basman (not completely surprising as we both ’invented’ the idea as an improvement on 1…b6). However, I only have the score of one game, Chandler-Basman, London 1979, which went 3. a4(?!) Bb7 4. axb5 axb5!? (simple and good is 4…Bxe4 5. bxa6 Bb7 or even 5…Nxa6) 5. Rxa8 Bxa8 6. Nd2 e6!? 7. Bxb5 f5 8. Qe2 (8. Qh5+ g6 9. Qe2 seems preferable) 8…Nf6 9. Bd3 c5 10. Ngf3 c4! 11. Bxc4 fxe4 12. Ne5 Bd6 with good compensation for the pawn. Black soon had an excellent position but later went astray. White could try 3. f3 when …Bb7 would reach a position which has seen before via the move order 1. d4 b5 2. e4 Bb7 3. f3 a6, e.g. 4. Be3 e6 (or 4…Nf6 5. Nh3 e6 6. Nd2 d5 7. e5 Nfd7 8. Bd3 c5 9. c3 Nc6 with a decent position, Tatai-Ljubojevic, Palma de Mallorca 1971) 5. Nd2 d5 6. Bd3 Nf6 7. e5 Nfd7 8. f4 ⩲ Portisch-Ljubojevic, Vrsac 1971. These games illustrate the possibility of transposing to a French type set-up, but if Black wishes, he might well defer …d5.

3… Bb7 4. Bd3

Murray Chandler has suggested the odd-looking 4. e5!? (gaining space and preventing …Nf6) 4…e6 5. c4 bxc4 (Basman would doubtless gambit this pawn) 6. Bxc4 Bb4+ 7. Nc3 striving for control of d5, though after 7…Ne7 Black’s position looks OK.

4… Nf6

Attacking e4 before White has the chance to defend with Re1. ECO mentions (by transposition) 4…e6 5. Nbd2 c5 6. dxc5 Bxc5 7. Nb3 Bb6 8. a4 ⩲ Spielmann-Hartingsvelt, 1914. Remarkably similar to the present game!

5. Qe2 e6 6. a4!?

 

Premature perhaps? Of course normal moves – O-O, Bg5, Nbd2 – are playable.

6… c5!?

A sharp reaction, but the natural 6…b4 is quite a reasonable alternative. Note that White was threatening to win a pawn by 7. e5. The text still offers the pawn, but only in return for the bishop pair and an initiative. While playing …c5 I felt sure Karpov would avoid such tactical lines.

7. dxc5

After 5 minutes thought. If 7. axb5 axb5 8. Rxa8 Bxa8 9. e5 c4 and now: (a) 10. exf6 cxd3 11. fxg7 Bxg7 12. Qxd3 when with such an open position the bishop pair, particularly the one lurking on a8, give excellent value for the pawn. Black might continue quietly with 12…Qb6, or maybe 12…Qa5+!?, for example 13. Bd2 Qa1 14. Qxb5!? Qxb1+ 15. Ke2 Bxf3+ 16. gxf3 Nc6! 17. Qxc6 Qxh1! and the black king runs to safety. (b) 10. Bxc4 bxc4 11. exf6 gxf6(!) and if 12. Qxc4 Rg8 with a fierce initiative. 7. c3 looks more vigorous.

7… Bxc5

7…b4!?

8. Nbd2

Again choosing the quietest path. 8 e5 was certainly worth considering. If 8…Nd5 just 9 axb5 and 8…Ng4 9 O-O leaves Black a bit out on a limb, e.g. 9…b4 10 h3 h5!? 11 Nbd2 followed by Ne4 or Be4. White reinforces his pawn on e4 which would be undefended after a series of captures on b5.

8… b4 9. e5

Less critical now as the knight can safely go to d5.

9…Nd5 10. Ne4 Be7 11. O-O

After this, yet another peaceful move, Black’s position is very comfortable. The last chance to try for an advantage was 11. Bg5. Then 11…f6?! 12. exf6 gxf6?? would lose disastrously to 13. Ne5! and 12…Nxf6 is also uncomfortable. I intended 11…O-O and if 12. Nd6 Bc6 when 13. Qe4 is met by …f5 and White must look after the N(d6). Probably White is a little better, but Black has chances for counterplay based on the a8-h1 diagonal, the f4 square and the break …f6. More active is 11. Bg5.

11…Nc6!

 

Much more accurate than 11…O-O. Now if 12. Bg5 f6! 13. exf6 gxf6! followed by …Qc7 and …O-O-O with a tremendously active position and automatic kingside attack.

12. Bd2 Qc7 13. c4

As expected, still playing quiet moves. The only alternative to defend the d-pawn was 13 Ng3 when Black could either challenge in the centre with …d6 (simplest) or …f6 (sharper), or as his king is still uncommitted, even consider …h5!?

13… bxc3 14. Nxc3 Nxc3 15. Bxc3 Nb4! 

Opening the long diagonal and putting the knight on its best circuit. Black has comfortably equalised.

16. Bxb4

Understandably, White did not want to part with his light-squared bishop, and since 16. Bb1 is scarcely palatable, this was the only move. Karpov later regrets his decision to part with the bishop pair, but after 16. Be4 White would have no means of challenging the future impregnable establishment of a black knight on d5.

16… Bxb4 17. Rac1 Qb6 18. Be4

To counteract Black’s powerful queen’s bishop.

18… O-O! 19. Ng5!?

 

After half an hour’s thought. 19 Bxh7+ was interesting – though again I was sure that Karpov wouldn’t play it! On 19…Kxh7 20 Ng5+ of course not 20…Kg8?? because of 21 Qh5, but 20…Kh6 also fails to 21. Rc4! threatening Rh4+ and if 21…g6 22. Qg4 and Black loses the B(b4). Correct is 20…Kg6 and if 21. Qg4 either 21…f5 22. Qg3 (22. exf6 Kxf6) 22…Qd4!? to block on g4 (23. h3? Kh5! winning) or even 21…f6!? [Note by Keene: Afterwards it was established that 19. Bxh7+ is quite dangerous but Miles was confident that Karpov would regard it as speculative and avoid it. The move played is the commencement of an artificial manoeuvre which ultimately loses the game for White. The simple 19. Bxb7 Qxb7 20. Rfd1 is perfectly adequate for equality, whilst a further superior alternative to the text is the complicated attacking variation 19. Bxh7+ Kxh7 20. Ng5+ Kg6 21. Qg4 f5 22. Qg3 when Black’s king is in considerable danger. NOTE: checking with the computer – 19. Bxh7+ Kxh7 20. Ng5+ Kg6 21. Qg4 f5 (21…f6 looks inferior, and 21. Qd3+ f5 22. Qg3 avoids it anyway) 22. Qg3 and now: (a) 22…Kh5 is Fritz’s first choice (intending 23. Rc4 f4!), but give it White and it soon comes up with 23. Nh3! which looks to win, e.g. 23…Bd2 (only move) 24. Rc4 g5 25. Qd3 g4 26. Qxd2 gxh3 27. Qxd7 Kg6 28. Rc3, while 25…Bxg2!? (Fritz) 26. Kxg2 Qb7+ 27. Kg1 g4 28. Qxd2 gxh3 fails to 29 Rh4+! (b) Fritz’s second choice is 22…Rg8, but it then finds the very attractive 23. Rc7! Bc6 24. Nxe6+ Kf7 25. Qb3! and if 25…Ke7 26. Ng5 Qxc7 27. Qf7+ wins – capture Rg8 and Bg7, play Qf6+ …Ke8, Rd1 with the decisive threat Qf7+ …Kd8, Nf7+. (c) Miles’ 22…Qd4 (Fritz’s fifth choice) probably deserves “!”. White seems to have nothing better than 23 Nxe6+ (23. h3 f4! 24. Qg4 Kh6 25. Qh4+ Kg6 is a draw) 23…Qg4 24. Qxg4+ fxg4 25. Nxf8+ Bxf8 and Black is fine, e.g. 26. Rfd1 Bc6 27. e6 Ra7! 28. Re1 Kf6 29. Rc4 g5/Bd6.]

19… h6 20. Bh7+?!

Distinctly artificial. I expected 20. Bxb7 Qxb7 21. Qe4 though Black is certainly not worse in the resulting ending. I suspect the text was rather due to the psychological effect of 1…a6. Karpov, having got nowhere from the opening, felt he should be doing something forceful. This is too optimistic and White should prefer the simple 20. Bxb7.

20… Kh8 21. Bb1 Be7

Of course not 21…hxg5? 22. Qh5+.

22. Ne4

Or 22. Qd3 g6 ⩱.

22… Rac8 23. Qd3??

 

A ridiculous oversight, though Karpov played it very quickly. However, Black’s bishops already give him the edge. The battery looks dangerous, but it never gets the chance to operate. [Note by Keene: This looks dangerous since White is lining up his queen and bishop as a battery against the black king. However, Miles was never one to be scared of phantoms and he demonstrates that White’s threats are in fact hollow.]

23… Rxc1 24. Rxc1 Qxb2

Gullibly taking the pawn(s). White’s back rank weaknesses prevent any serious counterplay.

25. Re1?

This doesn’t help. On 25. Rc7 Black has a pleasant choice between …Rc8, …g6 and …Bc6, and on 25. Rd1 g6 26. Qxd7 is impossible because of 26…Rd8.

25… Qxe5

Pinning the knight against the rook. White has nothing to do but take back one pawn, but the game is over.

26. Qxd7 Bb4 27. Re3 Qd5

Simplest. It is obvious after this move that any vestiges of a white attack have totally evaporated and that the world champion faces a hopeless ending, where he is material down and his pieces lack coordination.

28. Qxd5 Bxd5 29. Nc3 Rc8

[Note by Keene: The liquidation has left the world champion with a hopeless position. He is a pawn down, his a-pawn remains weak, his opponent possesses the bishop pair in an open situation and, to cap it all, White has problems with his own back rank. The remainder of the game is a mere technical exercise for one of Miles’ strength.]

30. Ne2 g5 31. h4 Kg7 32. hxg5 hxg5 33. Bd3 a5 34. Rg3 Kf6 35. Rg4 Bd6 36. Kf1 Be5 37. Ke1 Rh8 38. f4 gxf4 39. Nxf4 Bc6 40. Ne2 Rh1+ 41. Kd2 Rh2 42. g3 Bf3 43. Rg8 Rg2 44. Ke1 Bxe2 45. Bxe2 Rxg3 46. Ra8

I now sealed …Bc7

46…Bc7

but Karpov resigned without resumption. 0-1

 

 

Raymond Keene’s latest book “Fifty Shades of Ray: Chess in the year of the Coronavirus”, containing some of his best pieces from TheArticle, is now available from  Blackwell’s . His 206th book, Chess in the Year of the King, with a foreword by The Article contributor Patrick Heren, and written in collaboration with former Reuters chess correspondent, Adam Black, is in preparation. It will be published later this year.  

 

A Message from TheArticle

We are the only publication that’s committed to covering every angle. We have an important contribution to make, one that’s needed now more than ever, and we need your help to continue publishing throughout these hard economic times. So please, make a donation.