Cadogan Chess - The Blumenfeld Gambit
Cadogan Chess - The Blumenfeld Gambit
Cadogan Chess - The Blumenfeld Gambit
BASMAN, M.
Play the St. George
GLIGORIC. S.
Play the Nimzo-lndian Defence
KEENE. R. D.
The Evolution of Chess Opening Theory
KOVACS. L. M.
Sicilian: Poisoned Pawn Variation
MAROVIC. D.
Play the King's Indian Defence
NEISHTADT. I.
Play the Catalan
Volume 1 -Open Variation
Volume 2-Ciosed Variation
REUBEN. S.
Chess Openings-Your Choice!
SUETIN. A. S.
Modern Chess Opening Theory
TAULBUT. S.
Play the Bogo-lndian
WATSON. J. L.
Play the French
THE
BLUMENFELD GAMBIT
JAN PRZEWOZNIK
International Master
and
MALCOLM PEIN
International Master
PERGAMON CHESS
Member of Maxwell Macmillan Pergamon Publishing Corporation
OXFORD · NEWYORK · BEIJING · FRANKFURT
SAO PAULO · SYDNEY · TOKYO · TORONTO
U.K. Pergamon Press pic. Headington Hill Hall.
Oxford OX3 OBW. England
U.S.A. Pergamon Press Inc .• Maxwell House. Fairview Park.
Elmsford. New York 10523. U.S.A.
PEOPLE'S REPUBLIC Pergamon Press, Room 4037, Qianmen Hotel.
OF CHINA Beijing, People's Republic of China
FEDERAL REPUBLIC Pergamon Press GmbH. Hammerweg 6,
OF GERMANY D-6242 Kronberg. Federal Republic of Germany
BRAZIL Pergamon Editora Ltda. Rua Eca de Queiros, 346,
CEP 04011. Paraiso. Sao Paulo. Brazil
AUSTRALIA Pergamon Press Australia Pty Ltd., P.O. Box 544.
Potts Point, N.S.W. 2011. Australia
JAPAN Pergamon Press, 5th Floor, Matsuoka Central Building,
1-7-1 Nishishinjuku. Shinjuku-ku. Tokyo 160, Japan
CANADA Pergamon Press Canada Ltd .• Suite No. 271,
253 College Street. Toronto. Ontario, Canada
M5T 1R5
ISBN 0-08-037133-7
JAN PRZEWOZNIK
Contents
INTRODUCTION................................................................................... XI
ANALYSES
D.
I. 5 . .. bxc4 .. ............................. .. .. .. ... .. .... .. .. ...................................
. 50
2. 5 . . . ..tb7 ..................... .. .. ... . .. . . ... ....... . .. . ....................... ........ . ....
. . 50
3. 5 . . . d6 ··························································································· 51
4. 5 . . . 'ilf b6 ······················································································· 52
vii
viii Contents
4. The Blumenfeld Gambit Accepted
I . d4 lll f6 2. c4 e6 3. lt:lf3 c5 4. d5 b5 5. dxe6 fxe6 6. 53
cxb5 d5
A. 7. e3 ................................................................................................ 53
B. 7. .tf4 ......................................................................... ................. . 57
C. 7 . .tg5 . .
......... ............................................ ................................... 58
D. 7. g3 ................................................................................................ 60
E. 7. lt:l c3 ............................................................................................ 61
F. 6. . . . .tb7 .................................................................................... 64
A. 8. .txf6 . ..... .. ..
. .... ..
.. .... .
............ ..................................................... 75
B. 8. "ifa4 + . .
............... .. ..... .. . . . .. . .. ... . ...... ...
.... . . . . .. . .
.................. .......... 75
C. 8. lll x f6 + . .. . ... ........ . .
............................................. .. .... ... . . ............. 76
D. 8. a3
................................................................................................ 79
E. 8. g3 ................................................................................................ 82
F. 8. "it'd3 . . ..
................................................................................... .. ... 82
G. 8. e3 ................................................................................................ 84
H. 7. .. . .te7 . . . . .. .
.. ........................................... ...... . . . .. ..................... . 85
INDEX OF PLAYERS........................................................................... 1 02
LITERATURE . . .......
... .. . ........... .. ............................................................ 1 06
Acknowledgments
I could not have finished this book without the help and support of
a few friends. First of all I pay tribute to the Editor, Mr Colin Crouch.
Also, I wish to express my sincere appreciation to International
Master Malcolm Pein for his scrupulous reading of the manuscript
and a number of very useful suggestions and amendments.
Thanks also to Malgorzata Jamroz, who translated the Introduction,
Chapter I and a part of Chaper II of the book. I would especially like
to thank my wife Danuta, whose love, encouragement, patience, and
understanding made this book possible.
Introduction
xiv
1
Historical Sketch
1 4 . . . e4 1 5 lbd2 lbe5
However, in the same year, the ltld2 intending both "ikh5 + and
new move 5 ..ig5 was suggested ltlxc4 White would be clearly
instead of 5 dxe6 fxe6 6 cxb5. better.
According to Reti, chess theory 9 ltle5 ..ie7
had not yet spoken its last word It was not possible to take the
about this move. Even so, the pawn : 9 . . . ltlxe4 10 "ikf3 f5 1 1
move 5 ..tg5 challenged the cor "ikh5 + g6 1 2 ltlxg6 hxg6 1 3
rectness of Black's opening for a "ikxg6 + winning for White.
great many years. The discoverer 1 0 ..txc4 0-0 I I "ike2 ..tb7 1 2
of 5 ..tg5, a Russian master Dus- 0-0 "ikc7
4 The Blumenfeld Gambit
White's position is already won!
There is the threat of an attack
with e4-e5, .=. d 1 -d3-g3, lLlc3-e4-f6.
17 . . . a6 18 .ia4 .lh7
An indirect defence of the
bishop on e7, thus : 19 e5 lLld5 20
lLlxd5 .i xd5 2 1 .i xe7 .C.xe7
19 .C.d3 h6 20 .if4 .ic6 21 .C.g3
�h8 22 e5
As in the previous game, Tar
rasch-Aiekhine, a pawn advance
in the centre, displacing the
knight which defends the king,
decides the result of the game. It
was 1 4 . . . e5-e4 before, whereas
We can now sum up the results
now it is 22 e4-e5.
of the opening. Instead of the
22 . . . lLlh7 23 .ic2 .ig5
strong centre, Black has a weak
Since four long-range white
pawn on c5. The only possibility
pieces are involved in the attack,
of increasing its value may be
Black wants to relieve the pressure
sought in the manoeuvre lLlb8-c6-
by means of exchanges. 24 .ixg5
d4, occupying the d4 square, but
hxg5 25 .ixh7 � xh7 26 'it'h5 +
the lLle5 is an obstacle to this.
�g8 27 'iix g5 and Black resigns.
13 ..tf4 Wc8 14 .l:tad l lLlc6
In the above game Dus-Khot
1 5 lLlxc6 Wxc6 16 ..tb5 Wb6 1 7
imirski indicated the crucial, prin
.ig5!
cipal rule of the Blumenfeld Gam
bit : the struggle for the strong
centre is the keynote for domin
ation in this opening. Two further
attempts, by the great Polish
grandmaster Akiba Rubinstein,
were consistent with this rule.
After the moves I d4 lLlf6 2 c4 e6
3 tLJf3 c5 4 d5 b5, the moves 5 e4
and 5 a4 were introduced by him.
Both moves aim towards the
struggle for the centre. 5 e4 did
not work. Black is able to defend
himself against the attack-5 . . .
lZJgS, on 9 . . . lZJxe4 1 0 lZJxe4 dxe4 was found out that the exchange
I I lZJgS, and on 9 d4 he has an
. . . .�c8-g4xf3 is advantageous for
ideal reply : 10 eS!, with better Black. In Li pnitsky-Tolush,
play for White in all three cases USSR 1 950, instead of I I lZJbd2
(Voronkov, 1 97 1 ). the move I I tZJfd2! was played.
Historical Sketch 7
Later on, White was able to to do is to take good care of his
impose his own plan of play on strong centre! That is why it is
the centre : 6 cxd5 h6 7 �xf6 'lWxf6 necessary to answer 5 dxe6 fxe6 6
8 'ilfc2 d6 9 e4 a6 1 0 a4 b4 1 1 tt:lfd2 cxb5 d5 7 e3 �d6 8 tt:lc3 with 8
J..e7 12 tt:lc4 tt:Jd7 1 3 tt:lbd2 0-0 14 . . . �b7 before castling, to antici
�d3 a5 15 0-0 tt:le5 16 tt:lxe5! dxe5 pate 9 e4, and have ready the
17 tt:lc4! ttd8 18 ttacl 'lWg5 19 possibility of neutralising the
.!Hd 1 with a clear advantage. threat of e4-e5, namely by 9 . . .
Black received an even more tt:lbd7. I n case of 1 0 exd5 exd5 1 1
painful blow in a Chemin-Mi les J..e2 0-0 Black keeps the balance
game, played quite recently in due to his strong central pawn
Tunis 1985, where White rehabilit structure and actively placed
ated the move 1 1 tt:lbd2! and after pieces, in particular his bishops.
1 1 . . . .tg4, the move 1 2 e5!? was As far as the question of 5 � g5
played. is concerned, it seems that a new
weapon against it has emerged : 5
. . . 'ilfa5 + ! This check was first
tried by Rabinovich but his subse
quent play was not in accordance
with the requirements of the pos
ition.
Griinfeld-Rabinovich
Moscow 1 925
5 �g5 'lWa5 + 6 'lWd2 'lWxd2 +
7 tt:Jbxd2 bxc4 8 �xf6 gxf6 9 e4
f5? 10 �xc4 �b7 1 1 0-0 �h6 1 2
ttfe1
A Few Ideas . . .
This chapter aims at mak ing years and are immed iately associ
pract ical use of the results of ated w ith appropriate strategic
psychological studies on the think plans, tactical operations, and
ing of chess players. It appears even w ith characteristic single
that a consideration of the d is moves. The abil ity to put almost
coveries of rule psychologists as any concrete position into a frame
B inet ( 1 894), S imon and S imon work of schemes and typical solu
( 1 962), Chase and S imon ( 1 962), de tions makes the process of solving
Groot ( 1 965), Tikhomirov ( 1 976), problems at the chessboard con
and Krogius ( 1 976) can be siderably easier. It happens very
extremely helpful for the analyt often that a s ingle glance at the
ical work of chessplayers. position is enough for the master
The studies dealing with com to form a reliable opinion about
parisons between amateur and it. While the amateur laboriously
master seem to be of particular works out the mechanisms behind
value. It is knowing the way that the posit ion the master knows
chess masters think that can give them almost subconsciously. In
d irection to any self-educational the following position, for instance
work in chess. So, what is the root the pawn formation h7-g6-f7 auto
cause of the superiority of the matically suggests the idea of the
master over the amateur? pawn march h2-h 4-h5 and later
To begin with, in the course of either h5xg6, or h 5 -h6, tak ing the
solving problems in a concrete advantage of the weakness of the
position at the chessboard, the g7 and f6 squares, especially if
master is able to associate it with Black has no dark squared bishop.
a certain more general type of S imilarly the central pawn
position. Such positions have structure in the next diagram auto
accumulated in h is mind for many matically draws attention to the
II
12 The Blumenfeld Gambit
total of separate black and wh ite
pieces. The experience and know
ledge of the master enables h im
to integrate and form an opinion
about the position very quickly.
When forming his opinion, he sees
the pieces in more complex combi
nations of a spatial, functional and
dynamic nature. The amateur will
notice 6 pieces arranged in a row
on t he squares : <lo>g l , .l:l.fl, .i g2,
f2, g3, h2, whereas the master
will immediately see the integrated
plan f2-f4-f5xe6 and the Black whole: 'the position w it h the
response b7-b5-b 4xc3. fianchettoed bishop'. Naturally,
such an overall glance at positions
makes it easier to understand them
properly.
The observations of psycholo
gists are consistent with the
recommendations of Kotov, the
author of several excellent books
on chess tra in ing. According to
h im, the comprehension of the stra
tegic essence of certain basic pos
itions is the main task that a chess
player, w ishing to learn a certain
opening, must cope with. Having
The master does not have to understood certain basic positions
find all this out over the board of pieces and pawns on the chess
since he has it cod ified in his board, a chess player can better
memory. He automat ically understand the derived positions of
manipulates motifs, ideas, plans, the same opening. Moreover,
etc., j ust like a native speaker uses when speaking about basic posi
his grammar when speaking, auto t ions, Kotov does not mean
matica lly, and without realising it strictly the opening positions, i.e.
at all. the position after 1 0-20 moves.
Moreover, another significant The statement that an analysis
observation is that t he master per of the opening must always be
ceives a position as a sensible, accompanied by an analysis of
integrated whole and not as a sum the middle and endgame positions
A Few Ideas . .. 13
resulting from it, has become a the problem arises how to pfar
truism in the setting of chess train against the stronger opponent? Of
ing problems. The chess player course, every time this problem
must know-for the pieces and occurs, it must be solved primarily
pawns typical of a given arrange on the basis of both good pre
ment: match preparation and playing
-motives, i.e. positional bases of like a GM or I M . But both during
combinations preparation and during the game,
-ideas, i.e. final positions of com one may consider information
binations taken from psychological sources,
-means, i.e. the sequence of in part quoted here also. I wish to
moves, from the initial position call the reader's attention to these
through to the final one. sources, and their conclusions.
Let us make use of the above An article published in Chess
mentioned remarks before passing ( 1 984, author unknown) deals with
to a theoretical analysis of B lu the problem mentioned. An exper
menfeld's Gambit. The basic pos iment is described there in which
itions with typical solutions of the 24 players participated, divided
Blumenfeld Gambit are gathered into three groups :
in a later part of the chapter. I . High, with average rating 2022
Exploring all the typical strategic ( 1 78 B.C. F.);
plans, tactical operations, traps. 2. Medium, with average rating
etc., in one place should prepare 1 652 (1 32 B.C.F.);
the mind of the reader to such an 3. Low, with average rating 1 3 1 6
extent that he will be able to cope (90 B.C. F.).
with any analytical inaccuracies in Every subject had to find mate
the theoretical part of this work in one move in two positions. The
that might have been committed first position was natural, taken
by the author. from tournament play; the second
I would like to make a digres one was unnatural, with randomly
sion here; the reader forgive me, placed pieces. In both the posi
but rather a long digression. tions five moves giving check were
Namely, the increasing number of possible, but only one was check
'open' tournaments is a specific mate. Consider the results in the
feature of modern chess life. One table below.
of the particular characteristics of
such competitions is that they cre
ate peculiar situations in which Group
weaker chessplayers have a chance Position High Medium Low
to play with stronger players- Natural 8.5 1 4.25 1 8. 1 1
GM's or 1M 's. In such a situation Unnatural 36.3 35.0 33.4
14 The Blumerifeld Gambit
This indicates the average time the choice-of-move problem in
(seconds) for solving the mate in time trouble (90 seconds to choose
one task. a move), and then all four pos
Conclusion: even in tactica lly itions without time limitations.
simple positions (mate in one) Players ranged from I st category
the chessplayer's performance to I M :
depends on the type of position! The first group consisted of 20
This conclusion is consistent players of 1 st category-Eio rat
with the investigations of de Groot ing around 2000 (BCF 1 75).
( 1 965), Chase and Simon ( 1 973) The second group consisted of
and others. The authors men 20 players of candidate master
tioned above asked players to category- Elo rating around 2 1 00
reconstruct chess positions from (BCF 1 87).
memory, after brief exposure to The t hird group consisted of 1 4
them. They demonstrated middle national masters.
game positions and endgame pos The fourth group consisted of 6
itions, taken from chess books and international masters.
magazines, and, finally, random An experimenter put the
positions (pieces placed on the emphasis strongly on the fact that
board "without sense'). the task was not simply finding
In natural positions, accuracy, the combination! Conceivable sac
being measured by the number rifices might be right or wrong. In
of pieces placed on the correct complex positions all the subjects
square, depended on the strength had the choice between quiet
of the player. The stronger the moves or moves leading to risky
chessplayer, the better the per and very complicated variants.
formance of the tasks. Grand The results showed an interesting
masters performed these tasks interdependence: with increasing
almost fau ltlessly. The pattern strength, players preferred clear,
changed with random positions well defined positions and avoided
there was no significant inter unclear, risky and uncertain ones.
group difference in performance One may well ask : are there any
between GM's, 1M's, experts, and practical conclusions? I think that
weaker players! in the light of the results shown
I observed such a systematic above a heuristic recommendation
phenomenon in my own research appears; if your opponent is
(Przewoznik, 1 986b). In the exper stronger than you are, try to create
iment, 60 players from Poland untypical, unclear complications
solved the choice-of-move prob on the board. Maybe in such a
lem in four positions, I -IV. Firstly, case your opponent's advantage
in positions I and III, they solved in knowledge and experience (eru-
A Few Ideas . . . 15
dition on strategical plans, schem �
atic solutions, tactical associations
etc.) will be minimised. For this
purpose, I think, the Blumenfeld
Gamhit is ideal, an opening with
which I have done very well in
tournaments. The Blumenfeld
Gambit, 'refuted' 'bad', forgotten,
little played, is better in just such
a case than tired and well k nown
lines in the Queen's I ndian or
Modern Benoni.
Of course, in this digression I
have only sketched the problem. I
am aware that the matter is much bility of gaining the advantage;
more complex. However, in Black has achieved complete
answer to t he question of how to equality, as proved by t he latter
play against a stronger opponent, course of the game. Let us now
the most important role is played compare t he above position to
by chess aspects, the essence of the that after t he moves : I d4 tt:lf6 2
position. I hope t hat the material c4 e6 3 tt:lf3 c5 4 d5 b5 5 ..tg5
given here will be useful for read WaS+ 6 Wd2 'lhd2 + 7 tt:lbxd2
ers. And . . . to the Blumenfeld bxc4 8 ..txf6 gxf6 9 e4. Some
Gambit's advantage! similarities are striking, aren't
To begin with, let us make a they? In both positions Black has
reconnaissance in t he direction of doubled f-pawns and concedes
. . . the Sicilian Defence. Let us space to W hite, but on the other
have a look at the variation : 1 e4 hand, Black has a pair of bishops,
c5 2 tt:lf3 tt:lc6 3 d4 cxd4 4 tt:lxd4 two half-open lines for the rooks,
tt:lf6 5 tt:lc3 d6 6 ..tg5 e6 7 'iW d2 and a pawn mass which is difficult
h6?! 8 ..txf6 gxr6 9 0-0-0 a6. to break. Two critical questions
Theory is right in claiming that may be asked. Firstly, why is the
White is better. In the game Sue position from the Blumenfeld
tin- Botvinnik, Moscow 1 952, Gambit regarded as worse than
there followed 10 f4 ..td7 1 1 ..tc4 that from the Sicilian Defence?
h5 1 2 r;Pbl Wb6 1 3 .l:!.hfl? the
-
And secondly, is it not true that
move after which Botvinnik is said certain analogies in the arrange
to "have sighed with relief"'. The ment in bot h positions are very
exchange of knights is advanta much consistent with an analog
geous for Black. ous type of play, with an analog
White no longer has any possi- ous evaluation?
16 The Blumenfeld Gambit
For the reader who is going to !i:ld2-b3-a5-c4, J:[ d 1 -d2,
play the Blumenfeld Gambit in ll e 1 -d t and d5xe6.
the 5 � g5 'llt'a 5 + version it is 5. In the ending White can turn
advisable, here, to study positions the weaknesses on a7 and h7
of a similar type in the Sicilian to good account (see for exam
Defence. ple the famous game Cohn
R ubinstein, St. Petersburg
1909.).
Here are Black's perspectives.
1. Black has a pair of bishops in
an open position; these will be
his main trumps.
2. The g- and b-files may be used
by the rooks as very important
strategical routes, e.g. J:t g8-g4-
e4 or .l:!.a 8-b8-b4-c4.
3. Black can also successfully use
(even by a pawn sacrifice) three
important diagonals, i.e. a8-
h l, h8-al, h6-cl. Black p layers
have to keep these diagonals in
Here is a very important pos
mind all the time!
ition from t he Blumenfeld Gambit.
4. The potential weaknesses on
Such positions may arise in the d6, f7 and f6 may in fact prove
variation 5 �g5 'llt'a5 +, in other to be a source of power! In
words, where White supposedly modern chess strategy only the
refutes the Blumenfeld Gambit. dynamic evaluation of weak
Let us enumerate the main bene nesses is held in esteem. The
fi of the White p osition:
ts doubled f-pawns may gradually
I. U ndeniably, he has a space wear down White's center with
advantage. f6-f5xe4, and in the case of a
2. White can press hard in the preventive f2-f3, t hen once
centre, with his J:t e l, J:td l , more . . . f7-f5. The d6 pawn
�c4, !i:lf3, !i:ld2, � e4, d5. after the exchange d5xe6 and
3. He can increase his ad vantage f7xe6 can advance effectively.
in space with the manoeuvres : Broadly speaking, pawns are
!i:ld2-b3-a5; !i:lf3-h4, f2-f4, the heart of t he matter in the
d5xe6, f4-f5. Blumenfeld Gambit. Adherents
4. In the nick of time he can of the gambit have to nurture
concentrate pressure on the d6 this in their memory constantly.
pawn, with the manoeuvre : 5. The weak pawns on a7 and h7
A Few Ideas ... 17
can each be used as a 'desper �
ado': h7-h5-h4 or a7-a5-a4.
6
persistent advantage : 2 lLlcb l ..tf6
3 l2Jc4 �c7 4 l2J bd2 0-0 5 a5 .:. b8
6 f4 ± .
6
White has prepared the the
matic 1 . e3-e4? But the undefen
ded position of the bishop on d3
allows a tactical double attack.
I . . c4! 2 bxc4 l2Jc5! 3 �e2 dxe4
. Black threatens I . . . exd5 2
4 l2Jxe4 lLlfxe4 5 ..txe4 l2Jxe4 6 cxd5 ..tb7; also the exchange I . . .
�xe4 ..t b7 7 �e2 e4 8 l2Jd2 ..t c5 l2Jxg5 2 l2Jxg5 is favourable for
and White's king is in trouble. him. But White starts fighting on
And finally, a few examples from the queenside: I b4! �xb4 2 .:l. b l
other variations. 1t'c3 3 .:1. b 3 �a5 4 .:l. xb5 and
Black is not able to maintain his White controls the b-file.
pawn structure on the queenside. Such a review of the basic pos
After I a4! b4 White takes pos itions could be continued much
session of the c4 square, with a longer. Similarly, one might con-
A Few Ideas .. . 23
tinue a review of the typical plans, this method the reader can
combinations, manoeuvres. I hope improve his strategical and tacti
that the reader will complete his cal intuition of positions from the
own register after studying the Blumenfeld Gambit.
theoretical chapters. Doubtless, by
ANALYSES
3
A. 5 . . . it'a5 +
1) 6 '1Wd2
( I d4 tll f6 2 c4 e6 3 tll f3 c5 4 d5
b5 5 .1g5 '1Wa5 + 6 '1Wd2)
Before we proceed further, let
us note two old games in which
Black did not play according to
the spirit of the variation :
-6 . . . '1W xd2 + 7 tll b xd2 bxc4 8
.1xf6 gxf6 9 e4 f5? 1 0 .1xc4 .1b7
1 1 0-0 .1h6 1 2 .l:tfel with a clear
advantage for White, Griinfeld After this move White has some
Rabinovich, Moscow 1 925. The advantage in space and develop
move . . . f6-f5 was, of course, too ment, but from the square d2 his
early and Black had not knight doesn't control the key d5
prepared it adequately. White had square.
an excellent game using the d- and
7 bxc4
e-files, and the b3, c4, b5 and e5
Usually Black plays this move,
squares.
but he can still play in gambit
In the second game M arshaii
style: 7 . . . tll a6!? 8 dxe6?! fxe6 9
Hanauer, New York 1 937, the
cxb5 tll b4 10 �dl a6 11 b6
structure of Black's pawns was
J: b8 + Wilder- Aiburt, New York
damaged :
1 986.
-6 . . . 'ilf xd2 + 7 tll b xd2 exd5 8 As we have already seen in the
-t xf6 gxf6 9 cxd5 -tb7 1 0 e4 a6 Marshall-H anauer game, Black
Let us dismiss the continuation 1 0 should avoid 7 . . . exd5?!
. . . f5? I I -t xb5 fxe4 1 2 tll xe4 8 e4
-txd5?? 1 3 tll f6 + + - . Of course, White may also play
I I tll h4 8 -txf6, but the difference is sig
and White stood better. nificant only if after 8 e4 Black
28 The Blumenfeld Gambit
wishes to preserve his pawn struc 1 5 lL!h4 i.a6
ture. To that end, very interesting Black must always be careful
is 8 e4 i.e? 9 d6 i.xd6 (9 . . . i.d8 with this exchange! Which bishop
is bad because of the weakness on is better is an important question.
c5) 1 0 e5 i.xe5 1 1 lL!xe5 d5. We 16 i.xa6 lL!xa6 17 lL!g2 .ll b4
have an unusual position, and one 18 .ll el �d7 19 .ll e2 i.h6 20
which is in need of further practical lL!a5 .ll a4 2 1 lL!c6
tests. 9 i.xc4 is best met by 9 . . . Or 2 1 lLl b3 .ll b8 and Black's
exd5! 1 0 exd5 d6! ; 1 0 . . . i.b7 1 1 position is superior.
0-0-0 lL!xd5 1 2 .ll he 1 ! f6 1 3 lL!e4! 21 . . . lL!c7 22 b3 .ll a3 23 b4
is too risky. exd5 and Black has a winning
The sacrificial line 8 . . . i.b7 9 posttJOn, Kuligowski-Przewoi:
i.xc4 lL!xe4 I 0 lL!xe4 exd5 also nik, Warsaw 1 98 1 .
leaves Black with problems after I n fact, the Black counterplay
l l lL!f6 + ! ( I I 0-0-0?! dxe4 1 2 on the queenside is not necessarily
lL!e5 f6 1 3 lL! f7 fxg5 is unclear) so strong, and it is possible for
I I . . . gxf6 1 2 i.xf6. White to neutralise it. Let us note
Going back to the position after here a very instructive game :
8 e4, and assuming an eventual -8 i.xf6 gxf6 9 e4 i.b7 10
exchange on f6, the most promis i.xc4 lL!a6 1 1 .ll d 1 ! lL!c7 1 2 0-0
ing plan at Black's disposal is .ll g8
probably . . . lL!b8-a6-c7, Too risky for Black would be
i.b7, . . . .ll g8, . . . .ll b8 or . . . 1 2 . . . exd5 1 3 exd5 lL! xd5 14 lL!e4.
0-0-0, . . . d6. White has two equally 13 lL!b3 d6 14 lL!a5 i.a6 1 5
playable alternatives, castling long i.xa6 lL!xa6 16 lL!c4 �d7 17
or castling short. Let's look at .ll d2 �c7 1 8 .ll fd 1 .ll d8 1 9 h3
some practical examples: lL!b4 20 a3 lL!a6
-8 e4 i.b7 9 i.xf6 gxf6 10
i.xc4 lL!a6 1 1 0-0 lL!c7 1 2 .ll fd 1
Better is .!l ad ! , then ll fe 1 ,
lLl b3.
12 . . . .ll g8 13 g3 .ll b8 1 4 lL!b3
d6
The basic plan and structural
development for Black is as fol
lows: to attack on the b- and
g-files; meanwhile controlling d5
with a knight posted on c7, a
bishop posted at b7, and a pawn
on e6; and later to play . . . f6-f5
attacking White's centre.
The Blumenfeld Gambit Declined 29
21 l:l d3 fxe6, or 1 7
0 0 . fxe4 1 8 exf7 l:l g7,
0 0 0
White holds sway over the with the idea . . . d6-d5, would lead
entire board, and moreover Black to better play for Black.
is without counterplay; 17 . . . exd5 18 .i.ft .i.g7 1 9
Zivanovic-Ristic, Smederevska ll'lg5
Palanka 1 98 1 . For Black, better But not 19 g4 ..tf6 20 h3 h5
would have been 1 2 . . . d6, instead and Black stands better.
of 1 2 l:l g8, to solve some of
0 0 . 1 9 . . . .i. xb2 20 ll'l xf7 .i.c3 2 1
his problems on the queenside at ll'lxd8 <jo?xd8 2 2 tt'l b 3 .i. x e 1 23
an early stage, e.g. : 1 2 . . . d6 1 3 l:l xe l d4
ll'lb3 0-0-0! 1 4 ll'la5 .i.a8. Com
pare 1 2 l:l g8? 1 3 lLl b3 0-0-0
0 0 •
Lukov-Przewoznik, NaJ�czow
1 980. Black has successfully solved
his problems, for example 23
lLl xe6 c3 24 l:. e2 c2 - + ; 23
l:.d7 + �f6 24 lLlxe6 c3 (24 . . .
lLld3 + 25 �d I ? c3 26 lLld4
.1:. b2! - + ; 25 �d2! c3 + 26
'iti>xd3 c2 27 l:. gg7 c l "iW 28
l:. gf7 + �e5 29 f4 + ) 25 l:. gg7
22 . . . : e6! and Black has a
tt:Jxa2 + 26 �d I c2 + 27 �e2
won game, Przybylski-Przewoz
l:. f8 - + .
nik, Bierutowice 1 98 1 .
Black also stands well after the
I n the next two games we will
following continuation :
see another idea : with lLlc4 White
-7 . . . bxc4 8 ..txf6 gxf6 9 e4
protects the b2 square and attacks
lLla6 10 ..t xc4
the important squares a5 and d6.
If 1 0 lLlxc4 tt:Jb4 with an attack
-7 . . . bxc4 8 e4 lLla6 9 a3 J: b8
on d5 and c2; but playable is I 0
1 0 ..t x f6 gxf6 1 1 lLlxc4 lLlc7 1 2
lLla3 .1:. b8 I I 0-0-0 with the idea
lLlc3
of lLlxc4 or .i.xc4.
10 . . . l:. b8 1 1 lLlc3 l:. xb2 1 2 (see following diagram)
0-0-0 : b8 1 3 lLlb5 ..tb7 1 4 f4
12 a6
A novelty, after which the game
is very sharp and original. Probably bad is an early 1 2 . . .
d6 because of 0-0-0, f4, .1:. d2, ..te2,
14 exd5
: hd I with pressure. So Black
The knight on b5 is unprotected prepares with . . . lLlc7-b5-d4.
T he Blumenfeld Gambit Declined 33
0-0.
13 tZ:le3 g6 1 4 a3 � h6 15 0-0
'iW b6 16 axb4 cxb4 1 7 c5!? 'iW xc5
1 8 : ret W b6 1 9 n c4 0-0 20
n xb4 Wd8 21 ..ib5! a5 22
l:t ba4 ± Hartston-Martin, Lon
don 1 98 1 .
-8 'ihd2 b4 9 tZ:ld I d6?! I 0 dxe6!
i.xe6 1 1 g3 tZ:ld7 12 i.g2 l:t d8
The Blumenfeld Gambit Declined 35
( I d4 ll'lf6 2 c4 e6 3 ll'lf3 c5 4
d5 b5 5 .i.g5 W'a5 + 6 ll'l bd2)
According to Voronkov { 1 97 1 ),
only this move gives Black equal
chances. Its main weakness will
appear very soon. Black will not
be able to hold his pawn on b5
and White will take over the c4
square.
6 cxd5
1 ) 6 . . . h6 b) 7 .i.h4
White intends to play with the
( I d4 ttJf6 2 c4 e6 3 ttJf3 c5 4 d5 bishop pair. The pioneering game,
b5 5 .i.g5 exd5 6 cxd5 h6) Sakharov-Goldenov, Kiev 1 946,
White has three options : a) 7 went :
.i.f4 b) 7 .i.h4 c) 7 .i.xf6 -7 .i.h4 .i.b7 8 e4 g5 9 .i.g3
a) 7 .i.f4 ttJxe4? 10 •e2 •e7 1 1 .i.e5 f6
40 The Blumenfeld Gambit
1 2 'ihe4 fxe5 1 3 i.xb5 i.g7 14 Voronkov's assessment we should
lt:lc3 'ilff6 1 5 h4!. White stood dismiss 7 i.h4.
better.
c) 7 i.xf6
1 cannot agree with Voronkov's
This move is known to give
assessment, that after 9 . . . 'ilfe7
White better play.
(instead of 9 . . . lt:lxe4) 10 'ilfe2
7 . . . 'ilfxf6 8 'ilfc2
'ilfxe4 1 1 i.e5 'ilfxe2 + 12 .ixe2
Other moves are worse:
i.g7 l 3 lt:lc3 a6 14 h4 White is
-8 lt:lc3?! a6?! 9 'ilfc2 d6 10 e4
better. Encyclopedia ( 1 978) and
lt:ld7 1 1 a4 b4 1 2 lt:ld1 g6 Bukic
Taimanov ( 1 980) evaluate the pos
Bogdanovic, Yugoslavia 1 980,
ition as unclear. In may opinion
and now 1 3 lt:ld2! ..tg7 1 4 aS!,
after 14 . . . d6! Black is better, e.g. :
instead of 1 3 lt:le3, would have led
- 1 5 ..txd6 lt:lxd5 1 6 lt:l xd5
to White's advantage;
i.xd5 1 7 .i xc5 i.xb2;
-8 lt:lc3?! b4! 9 lt:le4 'ilf xb2 1 0
- 1 5 .ixf6 i.xf6 1 6 lt:le4 ( 1 6
d6 lt:la6! with the idea o f i. b 7 +
hxg5 hxg5 1 7 : xh8 + i.xh8 1 8
( Encyclopedia 1 978, Taimanov
lt:lxg5 i.xc3 + 1 9 bxc3 i.xd5)
1 980);
16 . . . i.xb2! 1 7 tt b 1 i.xd5 1 8
-8 lt:lc3 b4 9 lt:lb5 'ilfb6 1 0
lt:l xd6 + ..to>d7 1 9 tt xb2 ..to>xd6 20
'ilfc2!? ..tb7 ( 10 . . . 'ilf xb5? 1 1
hxg5 lt:lc6;
'ilfe4 + �d8 1 2 lLie5!) - +
- 1 5 hxg5 dxe5 1 6 gxf6 i.xf6 1 7
Balayan-Radovsky, Moscow
lt:le4 ..te7 1 8 0-0-0 f5 1 9 lt:l g3 e4.
1 982;
Less promising for Black is
-8 lt:lc3 b4 9 lt:lb5 'ilfb6 10 'ilfd3
7 . . . g5 immediately :
d6 I I :t e l ..td7 12 e4 a6 - + ,
-7 i.h4 g5 8 i.g3 d6 9 e4 a6 1 0
Gaprindashvili-Greenfeld, Sochi
a 4 b4 I I lLifd2 i.g7 1 2 i.d3 0-0
1 984 (Smagin, Radovsky)
1 3 lt:lc4 lt:le8 14 lt:lbd2 lt:ld7 1 5
-8 e4?! 'ilfxb2 9 lLibd2 c4 1 0
0-0 lt:lb6 16 lt:l x b6 'ilf x b6 1 7 lt:lc4
tt b 1 'ilfa3 I I tt xb5 ..tb4 1 2
'ilfd8 1 8 f4 g4 19 e5 ± , Geller
'iii b I a S 1 3 i. xc4 i.a6 + Grigor
Szabo, Stockholm 1 952.
ian-Arbakov, Moscow 1 982.
Smagin and Radovsky consider
7 . . . 'iii aS + as the best reply for 8 d6
Black. The reasoning behind this
evaluation is simple : in the vari This time this is the best way
ation 6 . . . 'iii aS + 7 lt:lc3 lt:le4 for Black. Let us compare:
the best answer for White is 8 -8 . . . c4 9 e4 i.b4 + 10 lLic3
..td2. From the h4 square the 0-0 1 1 i.e2 lLia6 12 0-0?
bishop cannot return to d2 . . . . Bukic-Lj ubojevic, Yugoslavia
Conclusion: Considering both 1 972, but after 1 2 e5! 'ilf b6 1 3 a4
the possibility 7 . . . 'iii aS + , and bxa4 1 4 0-0 (Bukic) White stands
also the improvement 14 . . . d6! to better;
The Blumenfeld Gambit Declined 41
6 ..txf6
Gri.infeld-Bogolyubov, Vienna
1 922;
-9 . . . 'ii xb2 1 0 i.d3 d6 1 1 0-0 In this position White stands
i.d7 1 2 'ii a4 ± Helling-Leon better, and this is the final evalu
hardt, Berlin 1 928. ation of the whole variation.
Also dubious is 9 . . . e5 when
D. 5 . . . bxc4, 5 . . . .tb7, 5 . . .
Black shuts his own bishop out of
d6, 5 . . . 'ii b6.
play :
-9 . . . e5 1 0 g3 g5 1 1 i.h3 i.g7 ( I d4 tt:lf6 2 c4 e6 3 tt:lf3 c5 4 d5
12 tt:ld2 ± Goldstein-Smith, Lon- b5 5 i.g5)
50 The Blumenfeld Gambit
When talking about the devel -6 e4 -.aS + 7 ..-d2 ..- xd2 + 8
opment and current situation of lLlbxd2 exd5 9 ..t xf6 dxe4 l O
the Blumenfeld Gambit it is indis ll:lxe4 gxf6 I I lLl xf6 + o r I 0 . . .
pensable to refer to some of the ..tb7 I I ..txg7! ..txg7 1 2 lLld6 +
less well known continuations that in both cases with advantage to
have been tested during earlier White.
tournament practice. In such a According to Encyclopedia
way we can get a much better and ( 1 978), after 6 ll:lc3 d6 7 e4 ..te7 8
closer picture of the gambit. The ..txc4, 8 . . . e5 equalises, but I
material presented here is not vast, cannot agree with Encyclopedia's
and further research is clearly assessment of such type of pos
needed in this field. ition, since in Moiseev-Przewoz
nik, NaJ�cz6w 1 979:
I) 5 . . . bxc4
-6 lLlc3 d6 7 e4 e5 8 lLld2 ..te7
9 lLl xc4 0-0 10 ..te2 White stood
better.
Other examples :
-6 lLlc3 * b6 7 ..t xf6 gxf6 8
*d2 lLla6 9 e4 ll g8 10 g3 ll b8
I I ll b l * b4 1 2 a3 -. bJ 1 3 *cl
* b6 14 ..txc4 lLlc7 15 0-0 ± ,
Lein-Lombardy, Lone Pine 1 98 1 ;
- 6 e4 -.as + 7 ..td2! ( 7 lLlc3
lLlxe4 8 ..txc4 ll:lxc3 9 -.d2 -. b4
lO * xc3 *xc3 + I I bxc3 d6 with
an unclear position) 7 . . . * b6 8
lLlc3 ..ta6 9 lLle5 ± (Encyclo
pedia 1 978, Taimanov 1 980).
A glance at those games is
enough to see that the outcome of
This exchange has the defect we the variation is unfavourable for
have talked about many times; Black. The early 5 . . . bxc4 is
Black allows White control and premature.
occupation of the c4 square;
2) 5 . . . ..tb7
especially, in the future, by his
knight. From the c4 point White's The bishop presses on the cen
knight has promising perspectives, tre; Black invites his opponent to
controlling the a5, b6 and e5 accept a gambit. But after 6 dxe6
squares, defending the b2 pawn, fxe6 7 cxb5 d5 8 e4!? is worthy of
and increasing its horizons by the consideration.
manoeuvre tt:lc4-e3-f5. If then 8 . . . dxe4? 9 ..-xd8 +
The Blumenfeld Gambit Declined 51
17 "i/ xc4 ± Eslon-De Ia Villa,
Linares 1 985.
Conclusion: The bishop on b7
cannot achieve anything useful,
and White is able to take advan
tage of this.
3) s . . . d6
In an earlier chapter I have tried does not accept the pawn in this
to show that it would be difficult line :
to find a clear-cut winning plan -5 dxe6 fxe6 6 b3 d5 7 e3 a6 8
for White in this opening. I J.. e2 J.. d6 9 0-0 0-0 10 J.. b2 J.. b7
have tried to demonstrate all of 1 1 J.. e5 li:lc6 1 2 J.. xd6 'it' xd6,
Black's chances after the most Jovanovic-Garda, Santa Fe 1 973.
unpleasant-for the time being! In the diagram position White
move, 5 J.. g 5. I think that this has five main continuations :
opening is genuinely playable. The A. 7 e3
purpose of this chapter is to sup B. 7 J.. f4
port such an evaluation for the c. 7 J.. g 5
Blumenfeld Gambit Accepted! D. 7 g3
1 d4 li:lf6 2 c4 e6 3 li:lf3 c5 4 E. 7 li:lc3
d5 b5 5 dxe6 fxe6 6 cxb5 d5 But in subsection F we absolu
tely must analyse Black's devi
ation, 6 . . . J.. b 7!?, on account of
our remarks in Chapter 1 .
A. 7 e3
( 1 d4 li:lf6 2 c4 e6 3 li:lf3 c5 4 d5
b5 5 dxe6 fxe6 6 cxb5 d5 7 e3)
(see following diagram)
(1 d4 tt:lf6 2 c4 e6 3 tt:lf3 c5 4 d5
b5 5 dxe6 fxe6 6 cxb5 d5 7 .i.g5)
1 2 . . . �dxeS 1 3 ..tc2 .t b4 +
1 0. 'lfd8 + ! �xd8 I I �f7 + 1 7 �fl 0-0 with initiative. I n con
� e8 1 2 �xeS ± clusion, 7 . . . � bd7 looks much
better than 7 . . . 'lfc7. But in such
7 �bd7
a complicated position not only
-8 e4 d4 9 eS! �g4 (9 . . . dxc3 every move by White, but also
10 exf6 cxb2 I I f7 + �xf7 1 2 every reply by Black has to be
..txb2 ± ) I 0 �e4 �gxeS I I �xeS verified by extremely precise cal
�xeS 1 2 �xcS ( 1 2'1fhS + !- Editor) culations. We should, therefore
..txcS 1 3 'lfhS + g6 14 'If xeS wait for practical tests .
.tb4 + I S �d 1 ! ( I S ..i.d2?!
F. 6 ..i.b7
.txd2 + 1 6 �xd2 'If aS + 1 7 �c2
. . .
( I d4 tt:lf6 2 c4 e6 3 tt::J O c5 4 d5
b5 5 a4)
1 0 ..txc4 dxc3 1 1 ..txf7 + �xf7
(see following diagram)
12 -. b3 + c4! 13 tt:le5 + �g8 14
A. Rubinstein's idea. This way -.xb7 ;;t , Rubinstein-Spielmann,
White wants to clarify the situ Vienna 1 922.
ation on the queenside. In the first In more recent games Black
game with this variation White followed Euwe's recommen
gained a small edge : dation-6 . . . exd5 instead of . . .
- 1 d4 tt:lf6 2 tt:lf3 c5 3 d5 b5 4 ..tb7 :
c4 ..tb7 5 a4 bxc4 6 tt:lc3 e6 7 e4 -5 . . . bxc4 6 tt:lc3 exd5 7 tt:lxd5
tt:lxe4?! 8 tt:lxe4 exd5 9 tt:lc3 d4 ..tb7 8 e4 ..te7 ( Euwe suggested
67
68 T he Blumenfeld Gambit
8 . . . lll xe4 9 ..txc4 "ii' a5 + 1 0 b4!
cxb4 1 1 0-0 with initiative) 9 ..txe4
0-0 10 0-0 lll xdS 1 1 ..txdS ..txdS
12 "ii' xdS lll e6 13 : d 1 "ii' b6 1 4
..tgS ..txgS 1 S lll xgS h 6 1 6 lll f3
: res 1 7 : ac t : a b8 1 S : xeS
"ii' xb2 1 9 h3, Rodriguez- Fernan
dez, Cienfuegos 1 983. White is a
little better, but Black can survive,
even so.
- 1 2 . . . lll a6 (instead of 1 2 . . .
lll c6, in the game above) 1 3 : d t
"ii' b6 1 4 ..tr4 : adS 1 S aS "ii' e6
1 6 "ii' b7 lll b4 1 7 "ii' xa7 "ii' xe4 1 S
..td6 ..txd6 1 9 : xd6 llld3 ;;!; ,
Kuznetsov-Kotliar, Moscow -S . . . exdS 6 exdS ..tb7 7 e4!
1 986. lll xe4 S ..txbS ..te7 9 0-0 0-0 1 0
(Another plan for Black is S . . . : e t llld 6 1 1 ..t n lll a6 1 2 lll e3
bxe4 6 llle3 d6 7 e4 eS, e.g. S lll b4 1 3 ..tr4 lll rs 1 4 d6! ..tr6 I S
..t xe4 ..te7 9 0-0 0-0 10 lll e l ?! : c t a 6 1 6 lll e4 ..txb2 1 7 : xeS
lll eS 1 1 r4 exr4 1 2 ..txr4 lll d7 : e8 1 8 • b l ! lll h 4 1 9 lll egS +
13 lll f3 ..tr6 14 ..tbS 'jj e7 and Ribli-G. Garcia, Leningrad 1 977;
Black is comfortable; Wheeler -S . . . exdS 6 exdS ..tb7 7 e4
Ward, Birmingham 1 987- lll xe4 S ..txbS ..te7 9 0-0 0-0 10
Editor) : e t rs 1 1 lll e3 lll xe3 1 2 bxe3
According to some theoretical ..tr6 1 3 "ii' b3 �hS 14 ..tr4 lll a6
analysis, 5 . . . exd5 6 cxd5 is poor IS ..td6 ± Vorotnikov- Kudinov,
for Black, as White obtains the U SSR 1 963.
c4 square for his piece. Here are Only the vigorous 9 e4!, after 5
examples : . . . exd5 6 cxd5 b4 7 ..t g5 h6 8
-5 . . . exd5 6 cxd5 b4 7 ..tg5 h6 ..txf6 "ii' xf6, would lead to White's
8 ..t xf6 "ii' xf6 9 e4! 'ii' x b2 1 0 advantage, but not the quiet
lll bd2 d6 1 1 ..tb5 + ..td7 1 2 defence of the b2 pawn :
0-0 -9 'ii' e2 d6 10 lll bd2 ..te7 1 1 e4
0-0 1 2 ..td3 lll bd7 1 3 0-0 : e8
(see following diagram)
1 4 : ret ..tf8 1 S ..tbS : e7 1 6
White is clearly better after 1 2 lll e4 a 6 1 7 ..te6 : bS 1 8 a S gS
. . . 'ii' f6 1 3 lll c4 ..te7 1 4 e5! or 1 9 h3 "ii' g6 20 : e3 ..t g7 with
1 2 . . . ..txb5 1 3 axb5 "ii' f6 14 lll c4 good counterplay for Black,
lll d 7 1 5 b6 a6 1 6 : e 1 (Taimanov Malich-Inkiov, DDR-Bulgaria
1 980; Voronkov 1 97 1 ). 1 982.
The Blumenfeld Gambit Declined. Other Lines 69
-5 . b4 6 lDbd2 d6 7 e4 eS 8
. .
( I d4 l2lf6 2 c4 e6 3 l2lf3 a6 4
l2lc3 c5 5 d5 b5 6 ..ig5 b4 7 l2le4
d6 8 ..ixf6)
(see following diagram)
17 f5
-.d5 + �g7 1 5 • xa8 exf3 + 1 6
But after �d2 .tb7 1 7 -.a7 lbc6 ( 1 7 0 0 .
18 . . . 'ihe2!
Black must simplify; passive
defence is of little help, for example
1 8 . . . �d8?! 1 9 lDxh7 .l:t e8 20 f4
1 8 . . . ..We5 is interesting, meeting
1 9 lDxh7 with 1 9 . . . f5 20 ..W xe5
dxe5 21 lDxf8 j_xf8, and Black's
queenside pawns will be dang
erous. White can improve with 1 9.
lDxe6! fxe6 20 f4! with a vicious
attack. This continuation is tactically
19 lDxe2 fxg5 20 :t e l f5 with acceptable, because if 8 d6, then 8
the two extra bishops and two . . . lDxe4 8 j_xe7 ..W b6 1 0 ..Wd3
passed pawns providing excellent j_b7 I I e3 f5 12 lDe5 with an
compensation for the queen in unclear position, or I I . . . lDc6!?
Pritchett-Crouch, Glenrothes 12 ..Wxe4 lDxe7 1 3 ..Wf4 lDf5 1 4
1 989. White won after 21 ..Wal .l:t d l j_xf3 1 5 ..Wxf3 0-0 1 6 ..Wf4
�f7 22 ..Wa4 .l:t a7? 23 f4! g4 24 WaS! and Black has a good game.
e4, but 22 . . . .l:t b7! would have After 8 ..Wd3 lDxe4 9 ..W xe4 j_b7!
been perfectly playable. 10 j_xe7 'iWxe7 I I .l:t d l d6 1 2 g3
Summary : 8 e3 does not e5 Black again stands very well.
threaten the viability of Black's 8 j_xf6 j_xf6! 9 ..Wd2
play. Of course, after 9 lDxc5 j_xb2
I 0 .1:t b I j_c3 + White has some
H. 7 . . . j_e7
troubles. But 9 ..Wd3!?
( I d4 lD f6 2 c4 e6 3 lDf3 a6 4 9 . . . d6!
86 The Blumenfeld Gambit
Very well done! Black solves all Secondly, in the variation 6
his problems connected with the ..t g5, the continuation 6 . . . b4 7
d-file. If now 1 0 dxe6, then 10 . . . lLle4 ..te7!? looks very attractive
..txe6 1 1 lLlxd6 + �e7 1 2 0-0-0 for Black, as it reduces many poten
( 1 2 lLle4 -.xd2 + 1 3 lLlfxd2 tial possibilities for White. Chiefly
..txb2 1 4 %1 b 1 ..tc3 1 5 lLlxc5 I mean these variations in which
..txc4 = ) 1 2 . . . n a7!, here both 1 3 White organises pressure along the
-.e3 nd7 1 4 lLlf5 + �e8 1 5 d-file.
n xd7 lLlxd7 and 1 3 lLle4 %1 d7 1 4 Thirdly, it is worth considering
-.c2 n xd 1 + 1 5 •xd 1 •xd 1 + that after the exchange ..txf6 or
1 6 �xd 1 ..txc4 give Black good lLlxf6 and g7xf6 Black's position is
prospects. very dynamic and flexible. The
10 a3 bxa3 1 1 n xa3 0-0 1 2 e3 e5 games Browne-Dzindzichasftvili
13 h3 ..te7 14 g4 f5 15 gxf5 ..txf5 (see Historical Sketch), Tarjan
with even chances. Alburt (see Chapter 6, section C)
Conclusion: it looks like 7 . . . are very instructive in this respect.
..te7 is worth considering in the On the other hand, games such as
future! van der Sterren-Sosonko (Chap
ter 6, section C), Agzamov-Inkiov
* * *
(Chapter 6, section D) show how
From the analyses mentioned the mobilisation of White's pieces
above one may draw a few conclu in the centre can muffle Black's
sions. search for counterplay.
Firstly, White players obstin In conclusion, I would like to
ately pursue the variation 1 d4 lLlf6 emphasise that throughout the
2 c4 e6 3 lLlf3 a6 4 lZ:Jc3 c5 5 d5 b5 variation analysed in this chapter
6 ..tg5, while many impenetrable there is still room for improve
possibilities are concealed in the ments both for White and Black.
variation 6 dxe6 fxe6 7 cxb5. I Therefore, the move 3 . . . a6 may be
would like to draw the readers' a strong alternative to the classical
attention to this area. lines of the Blumenfeld Gambit.
EPI LOGUE
87
APPENDIX :
SE LECTED GAMES
• There have been omitted only those few games, which the reader can find in the historical
chapter.
88
Appendix 89
30 :t g3 ..t>d7 3 1 :t g8 h5 32 :t h8 �
h4 33 :t h7 ..t>e8 34 :t xh4 t:i:Jc7 35
:t h8 t:i:Jb5 36 t?Jfxd6 + t:i:Jxd6 37
t:i:Jxd6 + ..t>d7 38 t:i:Jc4 ..t>e7 39
:t g8 :t b7 40 d6 + ..t>e8 41 h4
:t b8 42 h 5 1 -0
Bukic-Inkiov,
Banja Luka 1 983
I d4 t?Jf6 2 c4 e6 3 t?Jf3 c5 4 d5 b5
5 ..tg5 'jj' a 5 + 6 'jj' d 2 'jj' x d2 + 7
t:i:J bxd2 bxc4 8 ..txf6 gxf6 9 e4
t:i:Ja6 1 2 ..txc4 t:i:Jc7 I I 0-0-0 :t b8
1 2 :t he ! :t g8 1 3 g3 ..tb7 1 4 t:i:J b l :t e8 25 :t xe8 + �xe8 26 �cl
..ta6 1 5 ..txa6 t:i:Jxa6 1 6 t:i:Ja3 �e7 27 .i.d3 �f6 28 f4 ..td5 29
:t b4 1 7 b3 t:i:Jc7 1 8 t:i:Jc4 t:i:Ja8 1 9 t:i:Jd2 ..txa2 30 t:i:Je4 + �e7 3 1
..t>c2 t:i:Jb6 20 t:i:Jxb6 :t xb6 2 1 f6 + �d7 3 2 t:i:Jg5 h6 3 3 ..tf5 +
t:i:Jd2 h 5 22 t:i:Jc4 : b7 2 3 :td3 �e8 34 t:i:Je4 �f7 35 ..tg4 t:i:Jb5
..t> d 8 29 f4 h 4 2 5 f5 hxg3 2 6 hxg3 36 ..td7 ..td5 3 7 t:i:Jxc5 dxc5 38
�c7 27 :t h l :t b8 28 :t h7 :t g7 ..txb5 � xf6 39 �d2 c4 40 g4 c3 +
29 ll h8 exf5 30 exf5 :te8 3 1 :t f3 4 1 �d3 .i.e4 + 42 �e2 a5 43
:t g4 32 �c3 :t d4 33 :t d3 :t g4 .i.a4 h5 44 gxh5 ..t>f5 45 .i.e8
34 :t f3 :t d4 3 5 :td 3 :t g4 36 a3 � xf4 0- 1 .
:t g5 37 :t f3 :t g4 38 a4 :t d4 39
:t d 3 :tg4 40 a5 a6 41 :t f3 :t d4 Kuligowski- Przewoznik,
42 :t d3 :t g4 H. Poland 1 980
Spassov-Manolov,
Primorsko 1 975
I lLlf3 lLlf6 2 c4 e6 3 d4 c5 4 d5 b5 5
..tg5 'Wa5 + 6 lLl bd2 bxc4 7 ..txf6
gxf6 8 e4 f5 9 dxe6 fxe4 1 0 exf7 +
Malich-lnkiov,
DDR-Bulgaria 1 982
1 d4 tt:lf6 2 tt:lf3 e6 3 c4 cS 4 dS bS S
a4 exdS 6 cxdS b4 7 .i gS h6 8 .i xf6
•xf6 9 *'c2 d6 1 0 tt:lbd2 .ie7 1 1 e4
0-0 1 2 .id3 tt:ld7 1 3 0-0 J: e8
1 4 J: fe 1 .if8 1 5 .ib5 J: e7 1 5
tt:lc4 a6 1 7 .ic6 J: b8 1 8 aS gS 1 9
h 3 *'g6 20 J: e3 .ig7 2 1 J: ae l
tt:le5 2 2 tt:lb6 h S 2 3 *'e2 �h7 24 29 tt:l b6 J: b8 30 tt:l xd7 *'xd7 3 1
tt:l xc8 J: xc8 2S *' xa6 J: g8 26 tt:l xcS *'bS 32 J: dS *' xaS 3 3
*'e2 g4 27 tt:lh4 *'gS 28 tt:lfS J: ed 1 J: d4 3 4 d7 *'b6 3S tt:lb7
tt:lf3 + 29 J: xf3 gxf3 30 *' xf3 .if6 36 J: 1 xd4 exd4 37 J: d6 *'c7
J: a7 3 1 tt:l xd6 .ixb2 32 eS .ic3 3 8 g3 .ieS 39 d8*' + 1 -0.
Appendix 93
Haik-Barlov, �e4 8 ..td2 � xd2 9 � xd2 d6 1 0
Vrnjacka Banja 1 9 8 1 e4 a6 I I ..te2 l0d7 1 2 0-0 ..te7 1 3
a4 b4 1 4 �cb l ..tf6 1 5 �c4 'ii' c7
I d 4 �f6 2 c4 c 5 3 d5 b 5 4 �0 e6
1 6 �bd2 0-0 1 7 a5 ll b8 1 8 f4 ll e8
5 ..tg5 exd5 6 cxd5 'ii' a 5 + 7 �c3
1 9 � h i ..td4 20 ..tg4 �f6 2 1
�e4 8 'ii' d 3 �xg5 9 � xg5 ..te7
..txc8 ll bxc8 22 'ii' O ll cd8 23
10 �ge4 c4 I I 'ii' d 4 0-0 1 2 d6 ..td8
ll ae l 'ii' d 7 24 h3 h6 25 �h2 �h7
1 3 'ii' d 5
26 �b3 'ii' b 5 27 'ii' d 3 ..txb2 28
�xb2 'ii' xd3 29 �xd3 c4 30
�xb4 cxb3 3 1 e5 dxe5 32 fxe5 b2
33 �xa6 b l 'ii' 34 ll x b l ll xe5 35
�c7 lle7 36 ll b7 ll c8 37 d6
ll d7 38 a6 ll xd6 39 a7 ll dd8 40
ll a l �g5 4 1 a8'ii' ll xa8 42
ll xa8 1 -0.
T. Petrosian-Sax,
NiHic t 983
I d4 �f6 2 �0 e6 3 c4 c5 4 d5 b5
5 ..tg5 exd5 6 cxd5 'ii' a 5 + 7 �c3
�e4 8 ..td2 �xd2 9 � xd2 b4 1 0
�cb 1 ..ta6 I I e 4 g 6 1 2 ..t xa6
'ii' x a6 1 3 'ii' c2 d6 14 �c4 ..tg7 1 5
13 . . . ..ta6 14 g4 �c6 15 ..tg2 b4 � bd2 �d7 1 6 0-0 ll b8 1 7 a3
1 6 'ii' x a5 ..txa5 1 7 �d5 �d4 1 8
0-0-0 � xe2 + 1 9 � b I c 3 20 b3
ll fc8 21 �e7 + �f8 22 � xc8
ll xc8 23 �c2 ..t b6 24 ll he I
ll e8 25 0 �d4 + 26 �cl ll e5
27 ..tfl ..tb7 28 ll xd4 ..txd4 29
..tc4 g6 30 ll d I ..te3 + 3 1 �c2
..t xe4 + 32 fxe4 ll xe4 33 ll e l ll e5
34 ll fl f5 35 gxf5 gxf5 36 ..td3 f4
37 ..txh7 ll h5 38 ..td3 ll xh2 + 39
� b l ll b2 + 40 � a t ll d2 0- 1 .
Kuligowski- Ermenkov,
Nis t 979
I d4 �f6 2 c4 e6 3 �0 c5 4 d5 b5
5 ..tg5 exd5 6 cxd5 'ii' a5 + 7 �c3
94 The Blumenfeld Gambit
I 7 . . . b3 I 8 tt::l x b3 0-0 1 9 tt::l bd2 5 ..tg5 h6 6 ..txf6 'it'xf6 7 'it'c2 b4
.id4 20 �h I tt::l f6 2 I f3 tt::l h 5 22 8 tt::l b d2 g5 9 e4 g4 10 tt::l g 1 ..t g7
l:l ad 1 'it'b7 23 g3 'it'd7 24 �g2 f5 1 1 l:l b 1 h5 1 2 .id3 d6 1 3 tt::le2
25 b3 tt::l f6 26 h3 f4 27 g4 'it'e7 28 tt::l d 7 1 4 f4 gxf3 1 5 tt::l xf3 tt::le 5 1 6
'it'd3 tt::l d 7 29 'it'e2 h5 30 l:l h 1 0-0 'it'h6 1 7 tt::l x e5 ..t xe5 1 8 � h i
tt::l f6 3 1 'it'd3 hxg4 32 fxg4 f3 + 33 .id7 1 9 tt::l g 1 h4 20 tt::l f3 .i g3 2 1
tt::l xf3 W' xe4 34 W'xe4 tt::l xe4 35 b4 e5 dxe5 22 dxe6 .i xe6 2 3 ..tf5
l:l be8 36 l:l he 1 .ic3 H . ..txf5 29 'it' xf5 'it'f4 25 'it'h3 �e7
26 l:l bd 1 l:l ad8 27 l:l xd8 l:l xd8
Kozlov-Bykanov, 28 hxg3 hxg3
USSR 1986
1 d4 tt::l f6 2 c4 e6 3 tt::l f3 c5 4 d5 b5
5 .ig5 exd5 6 cxd5 d6 7 a4 b4 8 e3
.ie7 9 .i b5 + .id7 10 .ic4 0-0
1 I h3 h6 I 2 .if4 .if5 1 3 tt::l bd2
tt::l bd7 14 a5 tt::l e8 I S 0-0 .if6 1 6
'it'b3 a6 I 7 l:l a2 tt::l e 5 1 8 .ixe5
dxe5 19 .id3 .i xd3 20 "ii xd3
tt::l c 7 2 1 d6 tt::l b 5 22 tt::l e4 l:l c8 23
tt::l fd2 g6 24 tt::l c4 .ig7 25 l:l d I
�h7 26 'it'd5 b3 27 l:l aa 1 'it'h4
1 -0.
Cerna- Poloch,
Ruse 1 986
I d4 tt::l f6 2 c4 e6 3 tt::l f3 c5 4 d5 b5 5 29 'it'h7 l:l d6 0- l .
.ig5 exd5 6 cxd5 d6 7 e4 a6 8 a4
.te7 9 .txf6 .txf6 1 0 axb5 ..txb2 Am. Rodriguez-M. Gonzales,
1 1 l:l a2 ..tf6 1 2 tt::l b d2 0-0 1 3 ..td3 Biel l 985
..tb7 14 0-0 'it'c7 15 b6 'it'xb6 1 6 I d4 tt:lf6 2 c4 e6 3 tt::l f3 c5 4 d5 b5
'it' b 1 'it'c7 1 7 e5 ..te7 1 8 exd6 ..txd6 5 .ig5 h6 6 .i xf6 'it' xf6 7 'it'c2 b4
1 9 ..txh7 + �h8 20 l:l a4 g6 2 1 8 e4 g5 9 tt::l bd2 g4 10 tt::l g 1 ..tg7
..txg6 fxg6 22 'it'xg6 ..tf4 2 3 l:l e 1 1 1 l:l b 1 d6 1 2 ..td3 tt::l d 7 1 3 tt::le2
'it' f7 24 tt::le 5 'it' xd5 2 5 tt::l df3 tt::lc6 26 tt::l e5 I4 0-0 h5 1 5 f4 gxf3 1 6 tt::l xf3
'it'h5 + �g7 27 'it'g4 + �h7 28 'it'h6 1 7 tt::l xe5 ..t xe5 1 8 �h 1 h4
tt::l g5 + 1 -0. 19 tt::l g 1 'it'g7 20 tt::l f3 ..tf4 21 a3
aS 22 axb4 axb4 23 l:l a l l:l xa 1 24
Nikolic-Miles,
l:l xa i l:l g8 25 l:l a8 b3 26 'it' f2
Tunis 1 985
�d7 2 7 tt::l x h4 'it' h 6 2 8 g 3 l:l h8
I d4 tt::l f6 2 c4 e6 3 tt::l f3 c5 4 d5 b5 29 e5 �e7 30 'it'xf4 'it'xf4 3 1 gxf4
Appendix 95
l:txh4 32 .l:l xc8 .l:l xf4 33 .l:l c7 + ll:ld6 .txd6 1 5 exd6 �c8 1 6 Wb5
�d8 34 exd6 .l:l d4 35 .tfl .:. d I ll:la6 17 .tg2 exd5 18 .l:l he l Wf8
36 �g l exd5 37 .l:l xc5 dxc4 38 I9 .l:le7 .tc6 20 Wxa5 Wd8 2 1
.l:l xc4 .l:l d2 39 .l:l c3 .l:l xb2 40 Wxd8 + �xd8 22 cxd5 .tb5 23
.th3 1 -0. .l:lf7 ll:lb8 24 � b l .te2 25 .l:l d 2
.l:l e8 2 6 .l:l xf6 c4
Portisch-Rogers,
Reggio Emilia 1 985
1 d4 ll:lf6 2 c4 e6 3 ll:lf3 c5 4 d5 b5
5 .tg5 h6 6 .txf6 Wxf6 7 ll:lc3 b4
8 ll:lb5 �d8 9 e4 g5 10 .td3 .tb7
I I e5 Wg7 1 2 Wa4 a5 I 3 0-0 g4 1 4
ll:ld2 Wxe5 1 5 Wc2 .l:l a6 1 6 .l:l fe i
Wg7 1 7 a 3 h5 I 8 axb4 cxb4 I 9 dxe6
fxe6 20 .te4 ll:lc6 2 I .l:l ad l h4 22
ll:lb3 a4 23 ll:l3d4 ll:lxd4 24 ll:lxd4
.txe4 25 Wxe4 �c8 26 �h i
.tc5 27 .l:l e2 .l:l f8 28 ll:lb5 g3 29
�g3 hxg3 30 h3 a3 3 1 bxa3 bxa3 32
W b 1 .l:l f2 33 .l:l a2 .l:l xa2 34
Wxa2 Wb2 0- l .
Naumkin-011,
27 ll:le5 .l:l xe5 28 .l:l f8 + .l:l e8 29
USSR 1 985 .l:l xe8 + �xe8 30 .l:l xe2 + �d8
31 .l:l e4 c3 32 .l:l xb4 cxb2 33 f4
1 d4 ll:lf6 2 c4 e6 3 ll:lf3 c5 4 d5 b5 �c8 34 fxg5 hxg5 35 .l:l e4 .l:l a6 36
5 .tg5 h6 6 .txf6 Wxf6 7 ll:lc3 b4 .l:l e8 + �b7 37 .l:le5 .l:l b6 38
8 ll:lb5 �d8 9 a3 Wxb2 1 0 e4 a6 .tfl .l:l b4 39 .l:l xg5 .l:l f4 40 .tb5
1 1 axb4 exd5 1 2 cxd5 .tb7 1 3 .:. b I .l:lf2 4 1 h4 �b6 42 a4 .l:l h2 43
Wf6 1 4 e5 Wf4 1 5 ll:lc3 cxb4 1 6 g3 .l:l g8 1 -0.
Wg4 1 7 .td3 d6 1 8 e6 fxe6 1 9 h3
Wh5 20 g4 Wf7 2 1 .l:l xb4 e5 22 0-0 Lein-Lombardy,
a5 23 .l:l b6 .t xd5 24 ll:lxe5 1 -0. Lone Pine I 98 1
I d4 ll:lf6 2 ll:lf3 c5 3 d 5 b5 4 c4 e6
Malaniuk-Palatnik,
5 .tg5 bxc4 6 ll:lc3 W b6 7 .txf6
Tallinn 1 985
gxf6 8 Wd2 ll:la6 9 e4 .l:l g8 1 0 g3
1 d4 ll:lf6 2 c4 c5 3 d5 b5 4 ll:lf3 e6 .l:l b8 1 1 .l:l b 1 W b4 1 2 a3 Wb3 1 3
5 .t g5 h6 6 .txf6 Wxf6 7 ll:lc3 b4 Wet W b6 1 4 .txc4 ll:lc7 1 5 0-0
8 ll:lb5 �d8 9 e4 g5 1 0 e5 Wg7 I I .l:l g6 1 6 .l:l d l .ta6 1 7 b3 .tc8 1 8
g4 .tb7 1 2 Wa4 a5 1 3 0-0-0 f6 1 4 Wd2 Wa5 1 9 dxe6 fxe6
96 The Blumenfeld Gambit
Nikolic-Barlov,
Yugoslavia 1 982
I d4 lt:!f6 2 c4 e6 3 lt:!f3 c5 4 d5 b5
5 dxe6 fxe6 6 cxb5 d5 7 ..tf4 ..td6
8 ..txd6 'i' xd6 9 lt:!bd2 0-0 10 g3
a6 1 1 bxa6 ..txa6 1 2 ..th3 lt:!c6 1 3
0-0 e5 1 4 lt:!g5 <3;h8 1 5 lt:!de4
lt:!xe4 1 6 lt:! xe4 'ilf h6 1 7 'ilfxd5
'i'xh3 18 'i' xc6 ..t xe2 19 lt:!g5
'ilff5 20 J:[ fe 1 'ilf xf2 + 2 1 <3;h 1
..th5 22 'i'e4 ..tg6 23 'i'g2 'ilf f5
24 lt:!e4 ..t h5 25 <3;g 1 ..tf3 26
'i' h6 + 23 'i'h3 'i'xh3 + 24 gxh3
'i'c2 h6 27 J:l e3 ..t xe4 28 J:l xe4
..txb4 25 ..txd5 exd5 26 lt:!e6 J:[ f6
J:l xa2 29 J:l ae l · : b8 30 J:l 4e2
27 f5 J:l e8 28 J:l ad l <3;h7 29 lt:!c7
'i' xc2 3 1 J:l xc2 ·: bxb2 32 J:l xb2
J:l e5 30 lt:!a6 ..ta3 3 1 J:l f3 J:l e3
32 J:l d3 J:l xd3 33 J:l xd3 J:l xa6 34 l:t x b2 33 : xeS J:l c2 34 h4 �g8
bxa6 c4 0- 1 . 35 J:l e7 <:;f8 36 J:l c7 <:;g8 37 <:;fl
�h7 38 h5 <:;g8 39 J:l c6 <:;f7 40
g4 J:l c4 4 1 J:l c 7 + <:;f6 42 J:l c6 +
Browne-Quinteros,
<:;g5 0- 1 .
Buenos Aires 1980
I d4 lt:!f6 2 lt:!f3 c5 3 d5 e6 4 c4 b5
Ehlvest-Rogers,
5 dxe6 fxe6 6 cxb5 d5 7 e3 ..td6 8
Tallinn 1 985
lt:!c3 ..tb7 9 e4 dxe4 I 0 lt:!g5 ..td5
I I 'i' c2 lt:! bd7 12 lt:!gxe4 ..te5 1 3 I d4 lt:!f6 2 c4 e6 3 lt:!f3 c5 4 d5 b5
lt:!xd5 exd5 1 4 lt:!xf6 + 'i' xf6 1 5 5 dxe6 fxe6 6 cxb5 d5 7 lt:!c3 ..t b7
..te2 0-0 1 6 0-0 ..td4 1 7 ..te3 8 e4 dxe4 9 'ilfxd8 + <3;xd8 1 0 lt:!e5
..t xb2 1 8 J:l ad l lt:!b6 1 9 'ilf xc5 <3;e8 1 1 ..tf4 ..td6 12 J:l d 1 ..t d5
J:l ac8 20 'ilf b4 ..tc3 2 1 'ilfg4 'ilt'e5 1 3 lt:!g6 hxg6 14 ..txd6 lt:! bd7 1 5
22 ..tf3 J:l c4 23 'ilfh3 d4 24 .te l ..te2 <3;f7 1 6 0-0 J:[ ac8 1 7 b3
J:l a4 25 a3 'ilfxb5 26 ..te4 g6 27 J:l hd8 1 8 ..tf4 lt:!b6 19 ..te3 lt:!fd7
'ilfe6 + J: f7 28 ..tc6 'ilfc4 29 'iWd6 20 J:l d2 lt:!e5 2 1 J:l fd 1 J:l h8 22
J:l a6 30 J:l de l ..txe l 3 1 J:l xe l ..tf4 <3;f6 23 ..tfl <3;f5 24 ..t xe5
lt:!c8 32 J:le8 + <3;g7 3 3 'ilfe5 + <3;xe5 25 J:[ e I J:[ hd8 26 lt:!xe4
J:[ f6 34 'i'g5 J:[ f5 35 'i' h6 + <3;f6 ..txe4 27 J:l de2 J:l d4 28 f3 J:l cd8
36 'ilt' f8 + 'ilff7 37 'ilfh8 + 'ilt'g7 38 29 J:l xe4 + J:l xe4 30 J:l xe4 +
J:[ f8 + <3;e6 39 'ilt' xg7 : xc6 40 �f6 3 1 a4 J:l d l 32 �f2 J:l a l 3 3
Appendix 99
1 d4 lll f6 2 lll f3 e6 3 c4 c5 4 d5 b5
5 dxe6 fxe6 6 cxb5 i.b7 7 lll bd2
i.e7 8 g3 1fa5 9 i. g2 1fxb5 t O
0-0 0-0 t t a4 1fa6 1 2 b 3 llle4 1 3
Blocker-Dzindzichashvili,
i.b2 lll x d2 1 4 1f xd2 i.e4 1 5
New York 1 984
1fe3 1f b7 1 6 l:l. ad t a5 1 7 i.a3
l:l. c8 t 8 lll e t i.xg2 t 9 lll xg2 t d4 lll f6 2 c4 e6 3 lll f3 a6 4 lll c 3
l:l. a6 20 lll f4 l:l. b6 2 1 l:l. d 3 lllc6 c5 5 d5 b5 6 i.g5 b4 7 lll e4 d6 8
22 i.xc5 i.xc5 23 1fxc5 lll b4 24 1fa4 + 1fd7 9 1fc2 lll xe4 1 0
1fxa5 lll x d3 25 lll x d3 l:l. a6 26 1fxe4 f6 t t dxe6 1fc6 1 2 1ff5 fxg5
lll c 5 l:l. xa5 27 lll xb7 l:l. a7 28 13 lll x g5 l:l. a7 14 lll l7 l:l. xl7 1 5
lll d 6 l:l. c2 29 e4 l:l. a6 30 e5 l:l. b2 1fxl7 + �d8 1 6 e3 1fc7 1 7 1ff5
3 t lll e4 l:l. a5 32 lll d 6 l:l. xb3 33 1fe7 1 8 0-0-0 �c7 1 9 i.e2 1fxe6
l:l. c t h5 34 l:l. c7 l:l. xe5 35 l:l. xd7 20 1fc2 i.b7 2 1 i.f3 i.xf3 22 gxf3
l:l.d3 36 l:l.d8 + �h7 37 lll l7 lll d 7 23 1fe4 1fxe4 24 fxe4 lll e 5
l:l. ed5 38 l:l.e8 l:l. f5 39 l:l. e7 �g8 25 b3 lllc6 26 l:l. d5 i.e7 27 l:l. f5
0- 1 . lll e 5 0- 1 .
1 00 T he Blumenfeld Gambit
Huss-Lau,
Beersheva 1 985
Naumkin-Kozlov,
USSR 1 986
I d4 t2Jf6 2 c4 e6 3 t2Jf3 a6 4 t2Jc3
c5 5 d5 b5 6 i.g5 b4 7 t2Je4 d6 8
'fkd3 l:. a7 9 0-0-0 exd5 1 0 ..txf6
gxf6 1 1 cxd5 f5 1 2 t2Jg3 'fkf6 1 3 e3
..t g7 14 'fkc2 h5 1 5 ..td3 f4 1 6
t2Je4 'fkh6 1 7 exf4 'fk xf4 + 1 8 'fkd2
..t h6 19 �bl i. g4
Page numbers printed in bold type indicate the player with White.
Agafonov 55 Caracci 56
Agzamov 81, 1 00 Cerna 45, 94
Akhmilovskaya 34 Chernin 7, 47, 79, 92
Alburt 27, 38, 74, 78, 79, 80, 99, Chesnauskas 47
99 Christiansen 74, 80
Alekhine l , 41 Chukaev 47
Anikaev 72 Consultants 4 1
Arbakov 40 Crouch 8 5
Arkhipkin 57, 59 Cuellar 45
Asztalos 41 Czerniak 41
Baikov 47 De Boer 48
Balashov 69 De Ia Villa 5 1 , 96
Balayan 40 Dieks 49
Balogh 52 Drimer 45
Barlov 42, 43, 56, 58, 63, 93, 96, Dus-Khotimirski 3
98 Dzindzichashvili 1 0, 47, 76, 99
Bastrikov 4 1 , 92
Bilek 49 Ehlvest 61, 98
Blocker 76, 99 Epstein 56
Bobotsov 41, 45 Ermenkov 43, 43, 70, 93
Boersma 55 Eslon 5 1 , 96
Bogdanovic 40
Bogolyubov 49 Fatalibekova 59
Botterill 70 Fernandez 34, 68, 90
Braga 72 Formanek 9, 60, 63
Browne 10, 43, 54, 63, 98, 99 Furman 56
Bukic 30, 40, 40, 89
Bykanov 44, 94 Gaprindashvili 40
102
Index 1 03
Garcia G 68 Kapengut 60
Garcia R. 53 Kapitonov 44
Garcia S. 47 Karolyi 63
Geller 40 Keller 56
Gereben 52 Kholmov 59
Goldenov 39, 58, 59 Kivlan 55
Goldstein 49 Kmoch 5, 4 1
Gonzalez 47, 94 Knaak 47, 48
Gosin 43 Kojder 30
Gralka 29, 34, 89 Kostic, B. 3
Grave 57 Kostic, 3 1
Greenfeld 40 Kotliar 48, 68
Grigorian 40, 45, 60 Kozlov 39, 42, 44, 60, 83, 94, 1 0 1
Grooten 43 Kozlovskaya 69
Griinfeld 7, 27, 49, 5 1 , 96 Kozirev 39
Grushevsky 47, 49 Kudinov 68
Gulko 60 Kuligowski 28, 43, 89, 93
Gurgenidze 85 Kuznetov 43, 68
Gurieli 44
Gusev 72 Lagutkin 48, 49
Lahav 35
Haik 42, 93 Langeweg 34, 90
Hanauer 27 Larsen S. 55, 97
Hartston 34, 91 Lau 77, 1 00
Helling 49 Legky 4 1
Horvath 33 Lein SO, 95
Honlinger 41, 44 Leonhardt 49
H ulak 4 1 Lerner 85
Huss 77, 100 Levenfish 3
Levitina 44, 44, 69
Inkiov 30, 33, 68, 81, 89, 92, 1 00 Ligterink 55, 97
Ivanov 59 Lipnitsky 6, 42
Ljubojevic 40, 43, 49, 49
Jasnikowski 35, 35 Loffier 42
Johansen 43 Lombardy 9, 50, 60, 95
Jongsma 33 Lukacs 83
Jovanovic 53 Lukov 8, 30, 32, 90, 90
Junkie 59
M acht 52
Kalinin 41 Makarov 44
Kan 59 M aksimovic 56
1 04 The Blumenfeld Gambit
Malaniuk 48, 95 Popov 49, 49, 70
Malich 68, 92 Portisch 45, 48, 59, 82, 95
Manolov J. 36, 9 1 Povah 46
Maroczy 3 Preise 39
Marshall 27 Pritchett 85
Marszalek 57 Przewoznik 8, 28, 29, 29, 30, 32,
Martin 34, 9 1 32, 33, 33, 34, 35, 35, 35, 35,
Martinovic 43 35, 35, 50, 55, 69, 89, 89, 90,
Mazalon 29 9 1 , 99
McCambridge 47 Przybylski 32
Meduna 33, 33, 42
Michell 5 1 , 96 Qi Jingxuan 69
Miles 7, 47, 47, 70, 70, 82, 92, 94, Quinteros 54, 98
99
Milev 45 Rabinovich 7, 27
Minovic 57 Radovsky 40, 4 1 , 44
Mnatsakanian 44, 59 Razuvaev 42
Moiseev 50, 55, 97 Redzepagic 33
M use 69, 99 Rellstab 54
Renman 55
Naumkin 48, 83, 95, 101 Reshko 46
Nettori 42 Reti 54
Nikolic P. 47, 58, 94, 98 Ribli 68
Nurkic 4 1 Ristic 29, 88
Rodriguez A., 47, 68, 94
Oll, 48, 95 Rodriguez, 0. 42
Osnos 60 Roessel 46
Rogers 48, 48, 55, 6 1 , 82, 95, 98,
Palatnik 48, 95 101
Panov 56 Rojek 35
Pedersen 42 Rossetto 58
Pelikan 4 1 Rubinstein 67, 70
Peresypkin 47 Runstrom 42
Petrosian T. 43, 93
Pihajlic 34 Sahovic 31, 56, 56, 96
Plachetka 35, 44, 91 Sakharov 39
Platonov 69 Samisch 72
Pokrovski 5 1 Sax 43, 93
Polnareva 44 Scheipl 46
Poloch 45, 94 Semkov 30, 90
Polugayevsky 49 Shashin 41, 92
Index 1 05
Sher 4 1 Uhlmann 45
Shirazi 47 Ujtelky 57
Sinadinovic 56
Singh 46 Vaganian 45, 55, 72, 97
Smagar 55, 97 Van der Wiel 55, 97
Smith 49 Van der Sterren 77, 82, 100, 101
Soler 57 Voronkov 44
Sosonko 77, 000 V orotnikov 46, 68
Spassov 36, 43, 9 1 Vukic 49, 73
Speelman 38 Vukovic V. 70
Spielmann 5, 39, 4 1 , 4 1 , 44, 52,
67, 70 Walter 4 1
Spraggett 69 Ward 42, 63, 68, 72
Steiner 72 Wheeler 68
Stempin 35 Wilder 27
Szabo 40, 58 Wohner 57
Szily 41
Szymczak 48 Yakhin 70
Yudovich 72
Tarjan 78
Tarrasch 1 Zagorovsky 51
Tartakover 70 Zak 58
Tatai 42 Zaltsman 63
Tavadian 59 Zhuravlev 57
Tolush 6, 42 Zilbennan 60
Toshkov 83 Zivanovic 29, 88
Literature