The following is an exciting encounter from the 1931 Leningrad Championship, with notes in italics by the author.
Mikhail Botvinnik - Grigoriy Myasoyedov
Nimzo-Indian
1.d4 Nf6 2.C4 e6 3.Nc3 Bb4 4.Qb3!?
This move is out of favour today, but was played as early 1882 - four years before Aron Nimzowitsch was born - by Wilhelm Steinitz.
4...c5 5.dxc5!?
This is easily the most popular continuation in ChessBase's 2024 Mega database.
5...Nc6!? 6.Nf3 Ne4!? 7.Bd2 Nxc5!?
Much more common is 7...Nxd2, but Nimzowitsch preferred the text in a 1930 win over Efim Bogoljubow.
8.Qc2 f5 9.a3 Bxc3 10.Bxc3 0-0 11.b4 Ne4
 |
| Position after 11...Ne4 |
*****
*****
*****
*****
So far as in the Stahlberg-Alekhine game (Hamburg 1930*), which ended in White's defeat. In commenting on that game Kmoch pointed out that instead of the 12.e3 which was played the best continuation was 12.Bb2 b6, though this also was in Black's favour. The present game seems to show that even in that case Black's game is no better.
12.Bb2 b6
Simpler would have been 12...d6, as in the game Winter-Sultan Khan (Hastings Christmas 1930). But now a little surprise awaits Black.
13.g4!?
This interesting move had been previously studied in home analysis and, now at last, applied in practice. If I had foreseen what complications this novelty would lead to I would in all probability have given preference to the calm continuation 13.g3.
 |
| How should Black respond? |
*****
*****
*****
*****
13...Nxf2!
All other continuations led to opening up the g file, after which White's position, with the bishop at b2 and the rook at g1 would look threatening. For that matter, White had taken this knight sacrifice also into account. I foresaw that Black would not be able to recapture, and ended my analysis at that. But, as often happens, mistakes occur in home analysis too, to be refuted by actual play. White does in fact retain his piece, but he comes under strong attack.
14.Kxf2 fxg4 15.Rg1 Qh4+ 16.Ke3
It is easy to see that this is now the only move. If 16.Rg3 [then] 16...gxf3 17.Kg1 Nd4!, or 16.Kg2 gxf3+ 17.Kh1 Nd4! to Black's advantage.
16...Qh6+ 17.Kf2 Qh4+
Black is compelled to resort to perpetual check. A false scent would be 17...Qxh2+ 18.Rg2! Or 17...gxf3 18.Rxg7+ Qxg7 19.Bxg7, and White alone would gain.
18.Ke3 Qh6+ 19.Kd3
This is the very position White has studied, regarding it as favourable to himself. However, at the board, only after great hesitation did he decide on taking the king for such a daring walk.
19...d5
The strongest move! There was nothing good to be obtained from 19...Qg6+ 20.Kd2, or 19...e5 20.Qd2! Qd6+ 21.Kc2.
20.Qc1?!
The only reply, securing the king's retreat. Not 20.Qd2 Qg6+ 21.Kc3 Qe4! 22.Qg5 e5!, and White's position is critical.
Stockfish17 and Dragon1 much prefer 20.Qd2, improving on Botvinnik's line with 22.cxd5, claiming complete equality.
Now it may appear that White is getting out of the wood, but Black, consistently developing his attack on the White king, in the final resort achieves perpetual check.
20...dxc4+
ChessBase gives the last two moves exclamation marks, as indeed did Botvinnik. In fact ChessBase appears to have lifted Botvinnik's annotations wholesale without attribution. The engines show 20...Rf4!? would have caused White serious problems as both 21...e5 and 21...dxc4+ are major threats, eg 21.Ne5 Bb7 22.h3 Nxe5+ 23.Bxe5 Qg6+ 24.Kd2 Re4 25.Bb2 h5!? with a complicated position that the engines reckon is winning for Black
21.Qxc4
21.Kxc4 is bad: 21...Rf4+ 22.Kb3 e5! But it was worth considering 21.Kc2 (leaving the c file [half-]closed) though Black's three pawns for the piece made this continuation unconvincing.
21...Rd8+ 22.Kc2 Bb7 23.Qxg4
Now the threat Qxg7+ drives Black into the following continuation, forcing a draw.
23...Nxb4+! 24.axb4
Agreeing to a draw.
24...Rac8+ 25.Bc3 Rxc3+! 26.Kxc3 Qe3+ 27.Kb2 Rd2+! 28.Nxd2 Qxd2+ 29.Kb1 Qd1+ 30.Kb2 Qd2+ ½–½
*At the third Olympiad.
No comments:
Post a Comment