% BOOKTITLE = Kasparov on Kasparov 1973-85
[Event "?"]
[Site "?"]
[Date "????.??.??"]
[Round "?"]
[White "About this Publication"]
[Black "?"]
[Result "*"]
[Annotator "Garry Kasparov"]
[PlyCount "1"]
[EventDate "1952.??.??"]
[SourceDate "2012.10.05"]

{'Garry Kasparov on Garry Kasparov' part 1, is the first book in a major new
three-volume series. This series will be unique by the fact that it will
record the greatest chess battles played by the greatest chessplayer of
all-time. The series in itself is a continuation of Kasparov's mammoth history
of chess, comprising 'My Great Predecessors' and 'Modern Chess'. ---
Kasparov's historical volumes have received great critical and public acclaim
for their rigorous analysis and comprehensive detail regarding the
developments in chess that occurred both on and off the board.. This new
volume and series continues in this vein with Kasparov scrutinising his most
fascinating encounters from the period 1973-1985 whilst also charting his
development away from the board.} 1. -- {This period opens with the emergence
of a major new chess star from Baku and ends with Kasparov's first clash with
reigning world champion Anatoly Karpov - a mammoth encounter that stretched
out over six months. It had been known in Russia for some time that Kasparov
had an extraordinary talent but the first time that this talent was unleashed
on the western world was in 1979. The Russian Chess Federation had received an
invitation for a player to participate in a tournament at Banja Luka and,
under the impression that this was a junior event, sent along the fifteen year
old Kasparov (as yet without even an international rating!). Far from being a
junior tournament, Banja Luka was actually a major international event
featuring numerous world class grandmasters. Undeterred Kasparov stormed to
first place, scoring 11½/15 and finishing two points clear of the field.
Over the next decade this 'broad daylight' between Kasparov and the rest of
the field was to become a familiar sight in the world's leading tournaments.} (
1. -- {Garry Kasparov is generally regarded as the greatest chess player ever.
He was the thirteenth World Champion, holding the title between 1985 and 2000.
His tournament record is second to none, featuring numerous wins in the
world's major events, often by substantial margins. As well as his outstanding
successes, Kasparov has constantly promoted the game; he has done more than
anyone to popularize chess in modern times.}) *

[Event "?"]
[Site "?"]
[Date "????.??.??"]
[Round "?"]
[White "Foreword"]
[Black "?"]
[Result "*"]
[Annotator "Garry Kasparov"]
[PlyCount "1"]
[EventDate "2012.09.05"]
[SourceDate "2012.10.09"]

{The autobiographical three-volume 'Garry Kasparov on Garry Kasparov' is a
continuation of the series 'My Great Predecessors' (Parts I-V) and 'Modern
Chess' (Parts 1-4). --- Initially I was intending simply to annotate about
three hundred of my best games, dividing them into three volumes in accordance
with the stages of my competitive career: the pre-champion period (1973-1985),
the time when I was champion within the FIDE framework (1985-1993) and the
years outside of FIDE (1993-2005). But then I realised that to complete the
picture I needed to include not only the best, but also the most memorable
games and endings, which became landmarks on my chess career (although some of
them have already been annotated in previous books).} 1. -- {Throughout my
life it has been said that I won mainly thanks to deep and comprehensive
opening preparation. Thereby - deliberately or otherwise - my ability to play
creatively at the board itself was disparaged. 'I don't know another player
who would prepare so thoroughly for a match or a tournament. In this respect
he surpasses even the legendary Botvinnik', Anatoly Karpov once said about me.
In fact, without the ability to play creatively at the board, nothing can be
achieved, whereas the art of preparation has been a distinguishing feature of
many world champions and has always furthered the progress of chess thinking.
--- In the 1920s Alekhine worked at chess more persistently than anyone before
him in history, and as a result the entire culture of the 'amateur game'
sharply improved. In the 1940s Botvinnik's methodical mind and scientific
approach assisted the transformation of chess into a genuine profession. In
the 1970s Fischer's fantastic enthusiasm for analytical work forced any player
who did not want to 'miss the boat' to devote more time to theoretical
preparation. In the 1980s, when I became the leader of the new opening
revolution, the need for such preparation was already axiomatic.} (1. -- {I
grew up in an atmosphere of strict discipline, created by my mother. My chess
outlook was formed at the school of Mikhail Botvinnik, and my opening
repertoire developed under the influence of my trainers - the outstanding
analysts Alexander Nikitin and Alexander Shakarov. Apart from an innate
combinative gift, from childhood I possessed an unlimited appetite for
analytical work. I studied all the latest games of the leading grandmasters,
recorded novelties and analysed critical positions, trying to find
improvements. The choice of a particular opening system was always the fruit
of deep creative processing, and certainly not blind imitation. --- Later, in
the period when I was fighting for the world crown, my circle of analytical
helpers expanded, but as before I tirelessly generated my own ideas. And when
personal computers appeared, I was the first player to include machine
analysis in my system of preparation and to make systematic use of playing
programs and databases. Soon I discovered how weak some of my earlier
preparations had been. A useful, sobering discovery! Under the microscope of
powerful computer programs it transpired that at times I had gone along to a
game not with a some kind of Excalibur, but with a blunt pen-knife. ---
Nevertheless, my intensive preparation was invariably rewarded with good
results, even when by no means all the ideas were used. Between labour
invested and success achieved there always exists if not a direct connection,
then some almost mythical one. Probably also a psychological one: after all,
every time when beginning a battle, I thought that I possessed some 'deadly
weapon', and this gave me confidence, even if the weapon was unused or proved
to be altogether ineffective.}) (1. -- {This volume contains one hundred newly
annotated games and endings. It is partly based on my first book 'The Test of
Time' (1986). In the preface to it Botvinnik wrote: 'Kasparov is on the right
path: analyses of games should be published by a player not only to afford
pleasure to the readers, but also, by putting forward the results of his work
to their strict judgement, to be able to use the readers' criticisms to check
the objectivity of his searchings. This is an essential step for anyone who
wishes to become a researcher in chess. In this way creative and competitive
successes can be raised, and the very maximum possible "squeezed" out of his
talent...' --- The large amount of annotation work done then was, of course,
not free of analytical mistakes, and in addition the rapid progress of opening
theory has changed the assessments of numerous variations. Therefore a number
of annotations had to be significantly refined and amplified, and some
shortened. As Botvinnik anticipated, 'not all the games have survived'. But on
the whole my earlier conclusions have withstood the test of time.}) (1. -- {I
should like to express my gratitude to my former trainers Alexander Nikitin
and Alexander Shakarov for their help in preparing the manuscript for
publication.}) *

[Event "?"]
[Site "?"]
[Date "????.??.??"]
[Round "?"]
[White "1: Baku University"]
[Black "?"]
[Result "*"]
[Annotator "Garry Kasparov"]
[PlyCount "1"]
[EventDate "1984.??.??"]
[SourceDate "2012.12.06"]

{Childhood Years} 1. -- {The chapter title is an adaptation of the
autobiographical 'My Universities', in which Maxim Gorky describes his
experiences of early manhood in the university of life. (Translator's note)
--- It is the spring of 1963. In Moscow, in the Estrada Theatre, the
Botvinnik-Petrosian match for the world championship is taking place, and in
Baku Vladimir Makogonov, trainer in the chess section of the Regional
Officer's Club, is carefully analysing each game with his pupils. --- Valery
Asriyan: 'In early April, when the scores were level, I asked Makogonov who,
in his opinion, would win the match. "Petrosian", he replied without thinking.
"And who will be champion in 10 years time?" I ventured to ask. "Probably
Fischer", said Makogonov after a slight pause. "And in 20 years time?", I
jokingly enquired. Vladimir Andreevich smiled: "You are wanting to look too
far ahead. It is possible that the player who will be world champion in 20
years time has not yet been born". Of course, it was hard to imagine that just
a few days later, 13th April, would see the birth in Baku of a boy, whom his
parents would name Garry and who within 22 years would become world champion!'}
(1. -- {Strictly speaking, I could have been born a day later, since I came
into this world at a quarter to midnight. In a sense my mother would have
preferred this to happen. But I was nevertheless born on the 13th day of the
4th month of the year 63 (again 4+6+3=13) and, contrary to all superstitions,
for me this has proved a lucky number. So much so, that I even became the 13th
world champion, and, moreover, after an unscheduled match for the title, which
took place in the year of 85 (8+5=13). --- The origin of my name is curious.
This was one of the strong-willed decisions of my father, which influenced my
fate and my character. 'My name is Kim - short, and rather voiceless', said my
father, 'whereas a boy's name should be resounding. Let it be pronounced
firmly, let there be a letter 'r'. We will call our son Garry!' --- Baku was
the capital of Soviet Azerbaijan, a typical outpost of the imperial state. A
kind of large 'Odessa on the Caspian' - a melting-pot of different
nationalities, united by the common Russian language and the dominating
Russian-Soviet culture. My own roots are no exception: my mother was Armenian,
and my father Jewish. This is sometimes called an explosive mixture. At any
event, I think that I inherited both the sensible pragmatism of my mother, and
the capricious, creative nature of my father - and it was a combination of
these traits that determined the atmosphere in our home.}) (1. -- {My father,
Kim Moiseevich Weinstein, grew up in a family of musicians. He had an
excellent ear and he studied the violin at music school, but then he entered
the Azerbaijan Industrial Institute and became an electrical engineer, and
later the author of scientific articles and an almost completed dissertation.
Five years later my mother, Klara Shagenovna Kasparova, completed a course at
the same Institute, but in a different faculty, and after obtaining her
engineer's diploma on the speciality 'automatic equipment and remote control',
in the autumn of 1959 she joined the laboratory where my father was then
working. It was there that they met. --- My parents had a wide range of
interests in common - books, music, theatre, cinema - and chess! Both my
mother and my father had learned to play when they were young, and they loved
solving the studies and problems published in the Baku Vyshka newspaper. In
the early 1960s my father changed jobs and began working in a specialised
construction bureau associated with the oil industry, where chess was also
especially popular. It can be said that, from the first days of my life, chess
fluids were floating around me.}) (1. -- {The biographies of famous chess
players usually begin with some remarkable episode from their early childhood.
Thus the young Capablanca and Reshevsky, without knowing the rules of chess
and by simply watching the game being played in their family, suddenly began
defeating their fathers. Karpov was introduced to chess in the same way,
although his father was a much stricter examiner (this was, after all, the
Soviet Chess School!). --- I will not break with tradition and I will also
begin with my early childhood. My relatives recall that I began walking at 10
months - and I immediately became resolute and free. But even before that I
displayed exceptional tenacity in achieving a goal. Once my grandmother sat me
down with toys in my cot and went off to the kitchen to prepare dinner. But I
got bored and, overcoming all the obstacles, I gradually crawled my way to the
kitchen, where there was my favourite folding chair. My grandma was surprised
and carried me back. Within ten minutes I crawled in again... My grandma
wondered: 'How many times will he do this?' But in the end she lost count and
merely repeated: 'There's character for you!' --- It is said that I was a very
self-sufficient child: I could play for hours in a sand pit with a bucket and
spade. And when I started talking, I loved a game called 'Why?' The idea of
the game was to put an adult on the spot, by making them unable to find a
reply to this eternal question. And often, cheerfully smiling, I would
exasperate those around by endlessly asking 'Why?'.}) (1. -- {Very early I
learned the importance of numbers and once I surprised my relatives by being
able to distinguish on the street where the even and odd-numbered houses were.
Like all the children, I went to the kindergarten, but I was very unwilling
and I was often unwell - this was obviously a defensive reaction of the
organism. But if I had to go there, I used to display a feeling of
responsibility and innate punctuality. I was usually taken to the kindergarten
by my grandma, and if she were to linger carelessly at home, when the hour
hand on the wall clock inexorably began approaching the figure '8' I would
become terribly nervous and begin crying: 'Grandma, I'm going to be late!' ---
I began reading at the age of four, and I learned to put letters together to
make syllables - from newspaper headlines. I knew that, before we went out for
a walk, my father would look at the newspapers, and I would patiently wait for
him to finish. When a newspaper was put to one side, I would promptly unfold
it and with a most serious expression I would also unhurriedly 'look at it'.
My desire to imitate everything my father did was a source of great amusement
to my parents, and in this way I was introduced to 'reading' newspapers. And
soon, during one of our walks, sitting on my father's shoulders, I saw on the
roof of a building some large neon letters. I pointed with my index finger and
slowly pronounced the syllables: 'Dru-zhba' ('Friendship' - this was our local
cinema). --- When I was unwell, I spent long days in bed, and reading
completely replaced my toys. On one occasion, roughly a year later, I
staggered a visiting friend of my mother, when she saw me reading a newspaper
aloud: 'Po-lo-zhe-ni-e v Ka-i-re' ('Situation in Cairo'). And then the whole
article to the end. When she asked if I remembered what I had read, I told her
everything I knew from the newspapers about the situation in the Middle East.})
(1. -- {I had an exceptional memory. When I was not yet able to read, I would
remember by heart all the stories that had been read aloud to me, and later I
would enthusiastically retell them. And when I learned to read without
hesitating, I would do this very quickly and grasp everything. A passion for
books, like some kind of spiritual greed, has always possessed me. --- My
innate chess gift revealed itself at the age of five, when my parents, sitting
at the table, were racking their brains over the regular problem in the Vyshka
newspaper. As usual, I was sitting beside them, attentively following the
movements of the pieces. I didn't yet know how to play, but I knew the point
of the Latin letters and numbers along the edge of the board. And at some
point I suddenly suggested the solution of a difficult problem, which greatly
amazed my parents. 'If you know how the game ends, we'll have to show you how
it begins!' my father exclaimed, and he began explaining the rules. Soon I was
inseparable from chess, and a year later I was already beating my father.}) (1.
-- {Had I not shown an ability for chess at that time, I might well have gone
to music school. This is what my paternal grandmother Olga Yulevna, a music
teacher, was very much hoping. Her husband and my grandfather, Moisey
Rubinovich Weinstein, who died prematurely in the summer of 1963, was a
composer, conductor and violinist, and worked as artistic director of the Baku
Philharmonia. They thought that a musical education for a child was essential,
even if he did not have perfect pitch. 'The main thing is a sense of rhythm',
Olga Yulevna used to say. 'That's how it was with Lyona, whose musical talent
only emerged when he was eleven.' --- And how it emerged! In contrast to my
father, his younger brother, my uncle Leonid Weinstein, did not give up music,
but completed a course at the Conservatoire and became a well-known composer,
an Honoured Artist in Azerbaijan. He composed several operas and symphonies,
numerous chamber and vocal works, musical operettas, variety pieces, three
dozen songs, and music for the theatre, cinema and television, and when he was
a student he was a member of the legendary Baku group who in 1967-68 were the
champions of a popular national TV competition. (Incidentally, his son Teimour,
my younger cousin, although he studied medicine, was the artistic director of
the 'Lads from Baku' group, who were famous in the 1990s. Nowadays he is a
prominent Russian TV and film producer.)}) (1. -- {My father was categorically
against me attending the music school. 'The boy has an excellent analytical
brain', he said. 'He will study chess, not music!' --- It was an unexpected
decision: after all, my father had never been a serious chess player, whereas
my mother had a definite talent for the game. At the age of six she used to
beat boys older than herself, and she also competed successfully with adults.
But she preferred more active games. When she was in the eighth class, a
trainer visited her parents and tried to persuade them to allow their daughter
to play for the republic basketball team. But my grandmother would not allow
it: she did not like the idea of the inevitable travelling that it would
entail. So my mother did not take up either chess, or basketball. But she
firmly supported my father's decision to take me to the chess club. --- There
is no doubt that, during the seven short years that fate granted us to live
together, my father managed to exert an enormous influence on my entire future
life. My mother recalls how I literally used to keep watch at the door,
waiting for him to return from work, and with what joy I went for walks with
him. It was during those hours that my father gradually instilled in me his
own perception of life, and laid the foundations of my future outlook on
things. Our relationship was always adult-like.}) (1. -- {My father loved
geography and on my 6th birthday he gave me the best possible present. When I
woke that morning I discovered by my bed an enormous globe. And I even rubbed
my eyes, not believing that it was real. I was so happy! Already then I loved
looking at maps, and above all hearing stories about the journeys of Marco
Polo, Columbus and Magellan. It all began when my father read me Conqueror of
the Seas - the Story of Magellan by Stefan Zweig. From then on our favourite
game was to trace on my globe the routes followed by famous seafarers. ---
Soon I knew the names of the capitals of most countries, their populations,
land areas and masses of other interesting facts. On one occasion at Baku
airport, waiting with my parents to board a plane, I overheard one of the
passengers incorrectly naming the capital of Uruguay - and I politely listed
all, without exception, the Latin American countries and their capitals. It
was only my mum and dad who were not surprised - they, like all our relations,
were already accustomed to my daily questions such as: 'Do you know what the
population of Guatemala is?' --- Real stories about pioneers entranced me more
than any fairy-tales. Although my father did not draw attention to the
terrible misfortunes and hardships associated in those times with seafaring, I
realised that to accomplish such a journey, incredible courage was needed.
These stories awakened the pioneering spirit in me. I have always wanted to
lay new paths, even if, as in childhood, it only meant taking a new way home.
Throughout my chess career I aimed for unexplored tests by challenging
existing stereotypes. This is how important the timely present of a globe can
be... (Later this globe became a relic and was displayed in the geography room
of my former school.)}) (1. -- {Equally early - this time thanks to my mother
- I developed an interest in history. Unable to do anything by halves, I
immersed myself in the history of Ancient Rome, France, Spain and England. It
was those countries that fired my imagination. At the age of eight I read a
book about Napoleon by the Soviet historian Tarle, which made an enormous
impression on me. I have always been attracted by the biographies of strong
individuals who forged their own destinies. --- In the summer of 1970 my
father fell seriously ill. He spent many months in Moscow, at the Oncology
Centre in Kashirka, then he died of lymphatic sarcoma at the age of 39. The
last time I saw him was on 1st January 1971. He gave me a present of a chess
clock - I had just achieved third category rating. After that they would not
let me see him. It was my father's wish: he wanted me to remember him healthy
and cheerful, as I had always known him. They also did not take me to the
funeral, fearing that it might upset me too much. --- I remember saying to my
mother: 'Let's pretend that dad has gone away on business.' And at school for
a long time I continued talking about him as though he was still alive... But
years later there came a bitter realisation. When you're five or six, you
think that's how it will always be: your dad, and your mum, and life the way
it is. But then suddenly you wake up and you realise that your dad is no
longer there.}) (1. -- {My father was a man of firm principles, uncompromising,
and I am glad that I have inherited these traits. I always have with me a
photograph of him. By the age of thirty I became outwardly very similar to him.
My relatives think that, when speaking on the phone, I gesticulate exactly how
my father used to; and like him I easily get worked up, but just as quickly I
come back to normal. --- The two of us were left on our own, so my mother and
I moved in with her parents in Armenikenda - an ancient district of Baku,
where since time immemorial and until the tragedy of January 1990 there was a
large Armenian community. Our address was Yerevan Prospect, block 3. --- My
other grandmother, Susanna Bagdasarovna, completed a course at the Moscow
Finance Institute, but she worked for only a short time in her speciality (for
the State Bank in the 1930s), and she devoted the greater part of her life to
bringing up her three daughters - Klara, Nelly and Zhanna, and then me. She
taught me to be truthful, to trust people, and to appreciate any human
creation. A strict woman of strong character and good sense, my grandmother
enjoyed universal love and respect. Although she had lived through hard times,
she never lost her natural optimism and kindness. When I remember today the
words that she liked to repeat: 'It's wonderful that all my grandchildren are
of different nationalities', I admire her wisdom. Among my cousins there are
Armenians, Azeris and Jews. But my grandmother did not single any of us out,
preserving the right of each of us to her warmth and love.}) (1. -- {My
maternal grandfather, Shagen Mosesovich Kasparov, was an oil worker by
profession. Back in 1949 on the Caspian Sea, 100 km from Baku, they began
extracting oil from the sea bed, for the first time in the world erecting
offshore derricks. And by the end of the 1950s directly on the water, on piles
and stationary platforms, joined by gantries, the unique town of Neftyanie
Kamni had developed. At the age of nine I gave a simul' there against
oil-workers, which gave Shagen Mosesovich particular pleasure: for a good
twenty years he had worked as the chief engineer of a large offshore oil field.
--- After my father died, my grandfather retired and he was with me throughout
my school years. We became very close. He was an old communist, he revered
Marx's economic theory, and he believed that I would live in better times.
Towards the end of the 1970s he spent hours talking to me about politics, and
he introduced me to books on philosophy. We often argued about the various
events occurring in the country and in the world, and it was not always the
older person who won the argument. I was a very inquisitive youth; I read
dozens of books, to say nothing of newspapers, I listened to the seditious
recordings of songs by Vysotsky, Galich and Okudzhava, I asked a mass of
questions and on much I had my own point of view. But my grandfather did not
greatly approve of this spirit of defiance. Although we listened together on
the radio to 'Freedom' and 'Voice of America', he found it hard to accept
criticism of the state ideology. --- We had an especially heated debate at the
end of 1979, after the Soviet invasion of Afghanistan. But even my 'sincerely
believing' grandfather could no longer understand much of what the country's
leaders were doing. The endless queues and empty shelves in the shops,
resembling the post-war times, became a great disappointment to him...}) (1. --
{Nikitin: 'I often had occasion to visit the Kasparov home, where the ambience
of Klara's parents reigned - Shagen Mosesovich and Susanna Bagdasarovna. The
time spent with these calm and wise people is remembered now as a joyous dream.
They instilled much good in the heart of their favourite grandson.' ---
Incidentally, my late paternal grandfather was also a convinced communist. It
was no accident that he gave his first son the revolutionary name Kim - in
honour of the Communist Youth International (Kommunisticheskiy Internatsional
Molodyozhi). Despite the fact that in 1937 his older brother, the chief of
medical staff in one of the Baku hospitals, was subjected to repression and my
grandfather himself was a whisker away from being killed, he retained his
ideological convictions and his devotion to the Communist Party. But after the
exposures expressed at the 20th Communist Party Congress, he suffered a severe
heart attack... In the family circle, however, Moisey Rubinovich was
essentially alone. His sons Kim and Leonid (later he too had a great influence
on me), his nephew Marat Altman (a prominent lawyer), and their friends were
typical representatives of the intelligentsia: they always queried the
official viewpoint and were very critical about Soviet propaganda. For them it
was quite natural to have doubts about generally-accepted values. --- My
mother's scepticism was more a consequence of her analytical mind, rather than
mistrust of officialdom. Far more than ideology, she was concerned about
purely practical problems. She did not teach me what I should think, but that
I should have a critical attitude to everything that I read and heard. Her
technical education and work in a scientific research institute instilled in
her the habit of always relying only on concrete, trustworthy facts. After
spending 22 long years advancing from junior technician to section manager and
scientific secretary, in 1981 she left the scientific research institute in
order to devote herself entirely to her son's career. 'My mother plays a big
part in my life', I wrote in a school essay. 'She has taught me to think
independently, and she has taught me to work and to analyse my own behaviour.
She knows me better than anyone else, because I discuss all my problems with
her - school, chess and literary problems. My mother has taught me to
appreciate fine things, and to be principled, honest and frank.' --- It was
probably my father's and uncle's love of freedom, my mother's sensible
thinking and the many years of heated discussions with my grandfather that
determined my interest and serious attitude to politics throughout the entire
politically conscious part of my life.}) (1. -- {My family did not spoil me,
and there was no hint of imitating childish speech. They cultivated conviction.
At that time my mother was trying to restrain my obstinate striving for chess,
and not to pander towards it. When the first successes came and they began
praising me in the press, she gave me 'inoculations' against conceit,
suggesting: 'Everyone has a talent for something, but that talent doesn't
always reveal itself. You are lucky that your abilities have shown themselves
so early. Simply lucky!' And she would give me jobs around the house, like
sending me to the shop for bread and milk, or leaving me to look after my
younger cousins. --- My mother also remembers being summoned to the school and
talking to the teacher of the first-year classes, who reproached me for my
cheeky behaviour in a lesson. I had tried to correct her! And to the comment
that I shouldn't behave like that, since the rest would think that I regarded
myself as the cleverest, I retorted: 'But isn't that so?' Yes, my teachers had
a hard time with me. --- Later, when chess became my profession, I had hardly
any free time. But before this, after lessons I would run around the streets,
and quarrel and fight, like all little boys. At school my closest friend was
Vadim Minasian, with whom I remained friends for many years. The number of
times we got into scrapes together! But our most desperate escapades involved
fires. On one occasion we lit a bonfire in the school itself and began jumping
through it, to impress the girls... True, until I was sixteen I did not pay
any particular attention to girls, treating them disdainfully (although I was
also a little afraid of them). I once asked my mother: 'Why do girls spend so
long preparing for lessons? Why are they so narrow-minded? I hate them!' Now,
when she tells this story, she adds with a gale of laughter: 'Six months later
he fell in love.'}) (1. -- {I remember that in the third year at school a girl
sent me a note: 'I love you. And I want you to marry me.' I'm afraid that my
reply was not terribly gallant. Fortunately (or otherwise), my message was
intercepted by the teacher before it broke my admirer's heart. --- But when I
finally fell in love, the whole situation was reversed. She was younger than
me and was in a different class, so I somehow had to attract her attention.
But how? I gathered my friends and we played out a little show. They met her
on the street and pretended to pester her. It was a critical moment. And then
I appeared - a knight in shining armour, courageous and strong. Later I
arranged a firework display in her honour, with real rockets! --- My health,
or more correctly my illnesses, caused my mother a great deal of concern. At
the age of nine I had my appendix removed. The day after the operation my
uncle arrived at the hospital and found my bed empty. He was alarmed, but the
nurse calmed him down and took him to the staff room. Looking in, he saw me
lying on a trolley, giving a blindfold simul' against the doctors. --- When I
was ten the doctors became concerned about my heart, and diagnosed rheumatic
carditis. They said that I should avoid catching colds, as this might strain
my heart. After that my mother learned how to give injections, and wherever we
travelled she carried a syringe with her, since up to the age of fifteen I had
to take antibiotics. Later, thanks to my sports activities, I was able to lead
a normal life. I swam, played football and badminton, and went cycle racing...}
) (1. -- {I began travelling abroad to chess tournaments from the age of
thirteen. Before every trip I would prepare myself thoroughly for the
unfamiliar country, eagerly absorbing all the information I could find and
discussing it with my school teachers. I would return so full of impressions,
that at first I couldn't sleep. And only after I had released my emotions, and
told my classmates about everything I had seen, did I calm down. I remember
being hugely impressed by the fact that in Paris you could sit on the grass in
the parks. --- With my childish curiosity and the same thoughtfulness that I
applied to chess, I would compare what I had seen with our everyday life.
Occasionally this got me into trouble. Some adults reprimanded me for
criticising my own country. But already then I knew that you should not be
afraid to say exactly what you think. --- At school I found mathematics,
especially algebra, quite easy. I enjoyed solving difficult problems. The
teacher even tried to insist that I should take extra lessons with the aim of
developing my mathematical ability, but my mother was against this. She
thought that the combination of mathematics and chess was unlikely to lead to
me becoming a fully-rounded person, and she wanted me to study literature, and
to read not only prose, but also poetry. Life has shown that she was right.}) (
1. -- {Deep down I am a romantic, a person of feeling, or at least that is how
I see myself. This may seem surprising, but only to those who think that chess
is mainly a science and that it is played by impassive, computer-like people.
I firmly believe that the game of chess is an art, because, among other
qualities, a chess player must have a well-developed and rich imagination. ---
In view of their abstract character, chess, music and mathematics do not
require a knowledge of the world and a great experience of life. And so at the
age of five Reshevsky used to give simuls' against adults, at the age of four
Mozart was making compositions, the 12-year-old Pascal was drawing proofs of
complex geometry theorems on the walls of his home, and a boy called Kim Ung
Yong from South Korea was solving integral equations. --- There is a
well-known theory that chess, music and mathematical abilities are linked to a
powerful but narrowly specialised zone of our brain, and that in some way this
zone goes into action in early childhood and develops independently of the
brain as a whole. Well, this is quite possible. At any event, this theory
explains the emergence of child prodigies. But to emerge, even their
extraordinary gifts need favourable conditions! If Mozart's father had been,
for example, a painter, and not a music teacher, we might never have heard
about the brilliant composer.}) *

[Event "?"]
[Site "?"]
[Date "????.??.??"]
[Round "?"]
[White "First Steps"]
[Black "?"]
[Result "*"]
[Annotator "Garry Kasparov"]
[PlyCount "1"]
[EventDate "1984.??.??"]
[SourceDate "2012.12.06"]

{When I arrived for my first day at school on 1st September 1970 I was already
able to read and to write in block capitals. The lady teacher handed everyone
a sheet of paper and invited us to write or draw anything we wanted. And the
first words that I wrote at school were: 'Party, world, mama'. I still have
this sheet at home. --- At that time I was intending to become a medical
officer: an officer - in order to fight, and a doctor - in order to save the
wounded. But soon, when I was accepted into the chess club, such thoughts no
longer entered my head. --- For two years I played chess at school at the
slightest opportunity. And after I began beating my father, my constant
trainer became uncle Kotik - Konstantin Grigorian, the husband of my mother's
sister Nelly. Later I even gave him a book with the inscription: 'To my first
trainer'. My uncle recalls: 'Initially I won more often, but when Garik began
going to the club it became increasingly hard to beat him. He made amazingly
rapid progress, and within two or three months I was no longer able to win a
single game - against a seven-year-old boy! And that was it - we stopped
playing. In the only game we played later, Garik gave me odds (I think it was
a whole rook), and in the end he had just his queen left, while I had my queen,
some piece and a couple of pawns. Here he loudly exclaimed "check!" and made
an unexpected queen move. With the words "well, no one ever died from a check",
I moved my king, but Garik instantly - bang! - took my queen with his and won
the game. It turned out that, in giving check, he had deliberately placed his
queen en prise in the desperate hope that I would not notice. He really hated
losing!'} 1. -- {It was uncle Kotik who on 3rd September went with me on a
reconnaissance to the Pioneers Palace - to find out how and what. And later
uncle Lyonya took me down and enlisted me in the chess club. At that time I
had already moved in with my mother's parents, since my mother had flown to
Moscow, where my father was in hospital. My grandfather proudly informed her
by telephone that 'the trainer discovered Garik has phenomenal capabilities',
but my mother, naturally, was not in the mood for compliments. --- When I
first saw the Baku Pioneers Palace named after Yuri Gagarin - a white,
two-storey building overlooking the Caspian Sea - it looked to me like some
kind of fairy-tale chess castle. I was taken to my first lesson by Rostislav
Korsunsky - he was six years older than me and lived in the neighbourhood.
When I was a child my favourite piece was the bishop, and once Rostik and I
played a unique type of match: in the initial position, apart from the kings
and pawns, the only pieces I had were two bishops, and he had only two
knights! Already in 1975 Korsunsky became a master (alas, in the mid-1990s he
passed away). Incidentally, it should be said that apart from him there was a
whole group of gifted chess players in Baku: the future grandmaster Elmar
Magerramov, future international masters Mikhail Shur, Alexander Avshalumov
and Elena Glaz (and also Boris Sheynin - the future father of the prominent
grandmaster Teimour Radjabov). And earlier the chess section of the Pioneers
Palace had trained more than 300 first category players, 25 candidate masters,
a good dozen masters, the first Baku grandmaster Vladimir Bagirov, and the
challenger for the title of lady world champion Tatiana Zatulovskaya.} (1. -- {
My first real chess teacher was Oleg Isaakovich Privorotsky, a strong
candidate master and later an honoured trainer of the Azerbaijan Republic. He
immediately noticed my chess memory and my ability to shut myself off from the
outside world during a game. And after the first few lessons he remarked in
surprise: 'I don't know whether there have been similar beginners in other
towns, but there has been no one like him in Baku!' Indeed, I easily solved
the exercises given to the older children, within three months I had achieved
third category rating, at the age of eight - second category, and at the age
of nine - first category. --- In addition, in the initial classes I also went
swimming. But on one occasion in the pool the trainer reproached me for
turning up for training only fifty per cent of the time, and he demanded: 'You
have to choose - either chess, or swimming.' On returning home I shouted from
the threshold: 'Mama, I've been told to choose one of two. I'm choosing
chess!' --- Years later Privorotsky recalled: 'Garik mastered all the
rudiments of chess by himself, before he went to school; somehow imperceptibly
he understood the point of the movements of the pieces and the pawns - in this
way many great players are introduced to the ancient game. The boy was
interested not so much in chess puzzles, as in the logic itself of the
construction of combinations. Possibly this forced him to relate very
seriously to chess... I saw a small, sociable boy, who had an exceptional
knowledge of chess history. About the Capablanca-Alekhine match he knew
everything. It seemed that he was simply fanatical about chess... Successes
came quickly. He has an excellent memory. He achieved first category rating in
the second year of studies. When the documents for awarding the title reached
the city sports committee, they phoned me from there and asked: "Why this
forgery? How can there be any talk about first category at his age?" Six
months later they began talking about Garik's talent: everyone was staggered
by his brilliant and confident play in blitz tournaments.'}) (1. -- {I was
awarded first category rating after I reached the final of the Baku adult
blitz championship in June 1972 and my success was first mentioned in the
press: 'Third year pupil Garik Weinstein, playing standing up (when sitting he
can't reach all the pieces), achieved the overall best result in the first
stage - 9 points out of 9.' Or: 'Among the fourteen winners of the second
stage were 13 candidate masters - and a second category player.' And the main
West German newspaper Neues Deutschland unexpectedly published an article
entitled 'Chess wunderkind from Baku'. --- That memorable blitz championship
took place in the Republic Chess Club, where usually serious individual and
team tournaments were held. After triumphantly concluding the quarter-final
and semi-final, I 'lost my rhythm' in the final: nevertheless it was still
hard for me to play without a break against strong adult opponents. --- Vitaly
Melik-Karamov: 'Directly above the chess pieces a tuft of wiry black hair
stuck out on his crown. Garik won, without even having the opportunity to look
at the board from above. He looked at it from the side, the board was
transformed into a battlefield, and the pieces into a live little army, going
into battle with the enemy.' --- Valery Asriyan: 'A thin, lively, dark-eyed
boy stands with his mother, awaiting the moment when the arbiters will invite
the players to take their seats at the board. We - a group of candidate
masters, playing for not the first time in such a tournament - looked with
interest at this "child", who had already caused a stir by qualifying for the
semi-final. We didn't know much about him: he was called Garik, surname
Weinstein, and he was studying in the Pioneers Palace with the trainer Oleg
Privorotsky. And from time to time the anxious thought occurred to each of us:
"Suppose I lose to this boy? They will all laugh at me!" It went ok. The only
one they laughed at (and, as it soon transpired, quite wrongly) was Slava
Gadzhikasumov. Garik lost the remaining eight games in the first nine rounds,
but then he burst into tears, and his mother took him away, not allowing him
to finish the tournament. It was June 1972, and in distant Reykjavik a match
was about to start, a match which would present the chess world with its 11th
champion - Robert Fischer. And you would have had to possess an excessively
rich imagination or a very rare gift of foresight, to guess both Fischer's
departure, which shocked everyone, and the extraordinary fate of that
nine-year-old boy, who on that hot summer day departed in tears from a modest
club on the banks of the Caspian.'}) (1. -- {At precisely that time my mother
was very concerned about the fact that at night I would recite in my sleep:
'King b2, king b2...' etc. She approached a paediatrician, who advised her to
take the child to Kislovodsk. And in August, five of us - my mother and I, my
aunt Nelly (a doctor by profession), uncle Kotik and their five-year-old son
Zhenya - had a holiday there, renting rooms in private flats. In the grounds
of the nearby sanatorium, where we usually went for walks, we immediately
discovered a giant chess set - an invariable piece of equipment at health
treatment establishments in Soviet times. Of course, I promptly went into
battle - and easily defeated the adults, until I ran up against some candidate
master. After losing the game, again I burst into tears... --- And so, in my
third year at school I began playing in the city tournaments, and life
immediately became divided into humdrum days and festive ones. The festive
days were tournaments, while all the others were humdrum. But soon I also
began enjoying daily chess lessons, and there were no longer any humdrum days!}
) (1. -- {In January 1973 I reached a new level by achieving success in the
Baku junior championship - a Swiss event with more than thirty players (in one
of my notebooks the games from this tournament are preserved): 1-2. Korsunsky
and Melkumov - 7½ out of 9; 3-4. Mamedov and Weinstein - 7. I began with
four wins, including one over Korsunsky, but then suffered two defeats and
could no longer catch the leaders, although I won my last three games.}) (1. --
{The chief arbiter of the tournament, which took place in the regional
officers' club, was my future long-standing trainer Alexander Shakarov. As the
senior trainer of the Azerbaijan junior team, he was looking for players for
his team. And whereas my contact with him at the time was restricted to
handing in scoresheets at the end of games, my mother came to the games and
got to know Alexander Ivanovich. After finishing high up in the championship,
I caught his eye and at the age of nine (!) I was included in the junior team
of the republic. --- In March 1973, as preparation for the all-union junior
games in the summer, the Azerbaijan team made a tour of Latvia and Estonia,
where two matches were played against the teams of each of these republics.
There I 'bagged' 4 out of 4, and the trainers were finally convinced that I
should be included in the team. --- And in May, in the chess club attached to
the 'Veten' (Motherland) cinema in Baku, we played another friendly match
against our Caspian neighbours - the Turkmenistan junior team. There I played
one of my first memorable games (see the following game).}) *

[Event "1: Azerbaijan-Turkmenistan Match, Baku"]
[Site "?"]
[Date "1973.??.??"]
[Round "?"]
[White "Weinstein, G."]
[Black "Muratkuliev, S."]
[Result "1-0"]
[ECO "C84"]
[Annotator "Garry Kasparov"]
[PlyCount "63"]
[EventDate "1973.??.??"]
[Source "Everyman Chess"]
[SourceDate "2012.11.28"]

1. e4 e5 2. Nf3 Nc6 3. Bb5 a6 4. Ba4 Nf6 5. d4 {At that time my opening
repertoire was largely formed under the influence of Privorotsky, who avoided
the main theoretical paths and showed his pupils sidelines such as 5 d4;} ({
instead of the usual} 5. O-O {- Game Nos. 14, 31.}) 5... exd4 6. e5 Ne4 7. O-O
Be7 8. Re1 ({I also employed} 8. Nxd4 Nxd4 9. Qxd4 Nc5 10. Bb3 ({the usual
move is} 10. Nc3) 10... Nxb3 (10... O-O {was considered more accurate, and if}
11. Bf4 Ne6 {with equality}) 11. axb3 O-O 12. Bf4 Kh8 $6 ({after} 12... d6 13.
exd6 Bxd6 14. Bxd6 Qxd6 15. Qxd6 cxd6 16. Nd2 {White has only a minimal plus})
13. Nc3 b6 14. Rad1 Bc5 15. Qe4 Rb8 16. b4 Bb7 17. Qc4 Be7 18. Qd4 Bc6 19. Rd3
f6 20. Rh3 f5 21. Rd1 Bg5 22. Qe3 Bxf4 23. Qxf4 Qe7 24. Qd4 Rbe8 25. f4 Qe6 26.
Nd5 Rc8 27. c4 {, and White won (Weinstein-Rudyka, Vilnius 1973).}) 8... Nc5 9.
Bxc6 dxc6 10. Nxd4 O-O 11. Nc3 Ne6 $6 {This move surprised me: Black allows
the active Nf5 (I always liked placing a knight on f5), then Qg4 etc.} ({The
position is roughly equal after the old continuation of Janowski and Keres -} 
11... Re8 12. Be3 Bf8 13. f4 f6) ({or the more energetic} 11... f5 $1 {with
the idea of} 12. f4 Ne6 {(Kostic-Trifunovic, Zagreb 1946).}) 12. Nf5 Bg5 ({The
ancient} 12... f6 $5 {is slightly better, although here too after} 13. Qg4 fxe5
14. Nxe7+ Qxe7 15. Rxe5 Qd6 (15... Qf6) 16. Qg3 {White retains some advantage.}
) 13. Qg4 Nd4 {This tactical trick somewhat confused me, and I stopped to
think.} ({Earlier and later Black invariably went into an inferior endgame by} 
13... Bxc1 14. Raxc1 Qg5 15. Qxg5 Nxg5 16. Ne7+ Kh8 {. But what now?}) 14. Bxg5
Bxf5 15. Qg3 $6 {An error.} (15. Qh4 $1 {with the initiative was more accurate:
} -- (15... f6 16. exf6 gxf6 17. Bh6 Rf7 {(Stohl)} 18. Rad1 Rd7 19. Rd2 $1 c5
20. Bf8 Ne2+ 21. Nxe2) ({, or} 15... Qd7 16. Rad1 c5 17. Be7 Bxc2 18. Bxf8 $1
Bxd1 ({after} 18... Rxf8 19. Rc1 {White has the exchange for a pawn}) 19. Bxc5
(19. Bxg7 Qg4 20. Qxg4 Bxg4 21. Bf6 {is also good - Stohl}) 19... Ne2+ 20. Nxe2
Bxe2 21. Qe4 Qb5 22. Rxe2 Qxc5 23. e6 {etc. 'However, the thinking of a child
is unsophisticated and pure: Garik knew that the main thing in chess is to
give mate to the king, and for the creation of mating threats the queen stands
better on g3' (Nikitin).})) 15... Qc8 $6 ({After} 15... Qd7 $1 16. Rad1 c5 {
with such a fine knight on d4 Black would have had nothing to fear (} 17. b4 b6
{- Stohl).}) 16. Rad1 Nxc2 17. Re2 $6 Qe6 {An oversight, allowing White to
regain the material with an elegant combination and to obtain an obvious
positional advantage.} ({The prophylactic} 17... Kh8 {was sounder, although
after} 18. e6 $1 fxe6 19. Rdd2 {the knight on c2 would have given Black
problems:} h6 20. Qh4 (20. Bh4 $5 {- Stohl}) 20... Qe8 21. Bxh6 gxh6 22. Qxh6+
Kg8 23. Ne4 Qg6 24. Qxg6+ Bxg6 25. Rxc2 {with the better endgame.}) (17... Bg6
$2 18. Rdd2 $1 {.}) 18. Bf6 Bg6 19. Bxg7 $1 Kxg7 (19... Rfd8 20. Bf6 Rxd1+ 21.
Nxd1 Nd4 22. Rd2 Nf5 23. Qf4 {is to White's advantage, when} Qxa2 $2 {is bad
in view of} 24. g4 Ng7 25. Bxg7 Kxg7 26. h4 {. The kingside pawn offensive is
the recurrent theme of the entire game.}) 20. Rxc2 Rad8 21. Rcd2 Qe7 ({In the
event of the more resilient} 21... Rxd2 22. Rxd2 f6 {(Stohl),} 23. exf6+ Rxf6
24. f3 {would have led to a favourable structure for White. I think that
objectively White already has a technically won position, even against the
opponent's best defence: he can quite quickly create a pair of connected
passed pawns on the kingside, whereas it is far harder for Black to do the
same on the queenside.}) 22. h4 $1 Kh8 {Muratkuliev's last two moves are
frankly amateurish, dictated by the illusion of counterplay on the g-file.} ({
Again} 22... Rxd2 23. Rxd2 Kh8 24. Qg5 $1 f6 {(Stohl) was more appropriate,
but nevertheless the endgame after} 25. exf6 Qxf6 26. Qxf6+ Rxf6 27. f3 {is
better for White, for example:} Rf7 28. Kf2 h5 29. Ne2 Kg7 30. g3 Re7 31. Nf4
Bf7 32. a3 b6 33. g4 {with winning prospects.}) 23. Qg5 $1 {I remember being
terribly proud of this far from obvious move. 'It turns out that the h2-h4
advance also contained a positional threat. White unexpectedly seizes control
of the d-file and takes play into a highly favourable ending. "So young - and
so cunning!", you will say. "Fantastic!", I say as a trainer. For this one
idea - combining the romanticism of attack with the prose of the endgame - one
can immediately enlist a boy in the most prestigious chess school. The level
of understanding of technical subtleties is a good indicator in assessing how
promising a young player is.' (Nikitin)} Qxg5 24. hxg5 Rxd2 ({Things would not
have been changed by} 24... Rde8 25. f4 ({or} 25. g4 {- Stohl.})) 25. Rxd2 Bf5
26. f4 {Now Black can no longer escape from the vice: he does not have ...f7-f6,
White is threatening Kf2-f3, g2-g4, f4-f5 and so on, and therefore ...h7-h6(h5) has to be played, but then White simply captures on h6 and all the
same he advances his pawns.} Kg7 27. Kf2 h5 ({Or} 27... Rh8 28. Kf3 h5 29.
gxh6+ Rxh6 30. Ne4 {.}) 28. gxh6+ Kxh6 29. Kf3 Rg8 30. Ne4 Bg4+ 31. Ke3 Kg6 $2
{A blunder.} ({However,} 31... Be6 32. Nf6 Rh8 33. b3 Kg6 34. g4 {was also
hopeless.}) 32. Nf6 {. After the rook moves there follows Nxg4. --- Not a
complicated game, but an interesting one. Nikitin is still astonished by it:
'It is hard to believe that the white pieces were brought into battle by a
ten-year-old commander. There is not a single futile, pointless move, and the
harmony and logic in the actions of the white army are amazing. This little
masterpiece shows with what an enormous chess talent Garik was endowed from
birth.'} 1-0

[Event "?"]
[Site "?"]
[Date "????.??.??"]
[Round "?"]
[White "Entry into the all-union Arena"]
[Black "?"]
[Result "*"]
[Annotator "Garry Kasparov"]
[PlyCount "1"]
[EventDate "1984.??.??"]
[SourceDate "2012.12.06"]

{My first baptism of fire outside of Baku came at the All-Union Youth Games 
(Vilnius, 14-24 July 1973). Teams of the fifteen union republics, plus Moscow
and Leningrad, were divided into three semi-final tournaments (6+6+5), from
the results of which the first, second and third final groups were determined 
(also 6+6+5). Each team consisted of eight players: four juniors not older
than 18, two not older than 15 (I in fact played on board 5), and two girls.
--- In these Games, as was usual in such events, many future grandmasters
participated - Yusupov, Dolmatov, Alexander Ivanov (on board 2 he scored 8 out
of 8!), Malaniuk, Kochiev, Yermolinsky, Kengis, Lputian, Machulsky, Kantsler
and so on, to say nothing of a future world champion, the future lady world
champion Maya Chiburdanidze, and a challenger to this title, Elena
Akhmylovskaya. --- The top, final group produced the expected results: 1.
Russia, 2. Moscow, 3. Leningrad, 4. Ukraine, 5. Belorussia, 6. Georgia. At
that time the Azerbaijan team was a 'solid second division team' (this was
considered great progress, but from 1974 we began regularly finishing in the
top six), and in Vilnius it confirmed its reputation, finishing 3rd in the
semi-final. In this stage I scored just 2 out of 5, losing in the first round
to the formidable Kiev player Leonid Zaid (within six months he became USSR
junior champion, and soon also a master). What told were the anxiety and
inexperience of a novice: my opponents were four or five years older than me.
But in the final stage I went through undefeated, making four fighting draws,
and my team, finishing ahead of Uzbekistan, Armenia, Lithuania, Moldova and
Latvia, won this tournament and finished in 7th place overall.} 1. -- {The
game that I remember best was the one with the Latvian candidate master Edvins
Kengis, which was later published in Volume 16 of the Yugoslav 'Informator' 
(this was our debut in the cult publication of the late 20th century). ---
Nikitin: 'That day I watched Garik's game almost from the very start. My
attention was immediately drawn to the board at which two contestants of quite
different sizes were playing. A small, puny, dark-haired boy was looking
seriously at the board and endlessly fidgeting on his chair. And sitting
immobile opposite him was a tall, good-looking Latvian, who when thinking
would literally tower over the battlefield. Compared with Garik, Kengis looked
not only a giant, but also a highly-experienced fighter, but the events which
occurred on the board forced the age difference to be forgotten.'} *

[Event "2: All-Union Youth Games, Vilnius"]
[Site "?"]
[Date "1973.07.20"]
[Round "?"]
[White "Kengis, E."]
[Black "Weinstein, G."]
[Result "1/2-1/2"]
[ECO "B89"]
[Annotator "Garry Kasparov"]
[PlyCount "108"]
[EventDate "1973.??.??"]
[Source "Everyman Chess"]
[SourceDate "2012.11.28"]

1. e4 c5 2. Nf3 d6 3. d4 cxd4 4. Nxd4 Nf6 5. Nc3 Nc6 6. Bc4 e6 7. Bb3 Be7 8.
Be3 a6 9. Qe2 {The Velimirovic Attack was fashionable at that time, and it had
also been analysed by the Azerbaijan team.} Qc7 10. O-O-O O-O 11. g4 {This is
what Fischer played against Larsen (Palma de Mallorca Interzonal 1970).} ({
Later} 11. Rhg1 {came to the fore, with the idea of} Nxd4 $6 12. Bxd4 $1 {.
For details, see Revolution in the 70s (pp.154-155).}) 11... Nd7 {A new move,
employed by Larsen, but before that recommended by Nikitin - my future trainer!
} ({But} 11... Nxd4 $1 12. Rxd4 (12. Bxd4 {involves a dubious pawn sacrifice})
12... b5 {involves a dubious pawn sacrifice} 13. g5 Nd7 14. Qh5 Rd8 (14... g6
$5) 15. Nd5 (15. Rg1 {is correct}) 15... exd5 16. Bxd5 Ne5 $1 {.}) 12. g5 ({
Fischer responded badly -} 12. h4 $6 Nc5 13. g5 b5 14. f3 $2 {, and after} (14.
h5 $1) 14... Bd7 $1 15. Qg2 b4 16. Nce2 Nxb3+ 17. axb3 a5 {Larsen repelled the
premature attack and gained a memorable victory (Game No.42 in Volume IV of
'My Great Predecessors'). This symbolic game influenced an entire chess
generation.}) ({Only later did it transpire that here there is a very
dangerous piece sacrifice -} 12. Nf5 $1 {.}) 12... Nc5 13. Rhg1 Bd7 14. Rg3
Rfc8 15. Qh5 {(this typical attacking plan looks menacing, but I was prepared
for it)} g6 16. Qh6 Bf8 17. Qh4 Nxb3+ 18. axb3 Be7 {With the idea of 19 Rh3 h5
- an important defensive device! Shakarov taught us that Black's fortress was
impregnable, and later this confidence came in useful to me in similar
Scheveningen positions.} ({Today it is apparent that} 18... Nxd4 $5 19. Bxd4 e5
20. Be3 b5 {is also good (Valenti-Paoli, Reggio Emilia 1975/76). But I played
'as I had been taught'. And whereas up till now we had made our moves quickly,
here Kengis stopped to think.}) 19. f4 ({Avoiding the repetition of moves -} 
19. Qh6 Bf8 {.}) ({If} 19. Nde2 {either} h5 ({or} 19... Nb4 $1 {is acceptable})
({but not} 19... b5 $2 20. Nf4 $1)) 19... b5 20. Qh6 {Now White himself
repeats moves - per-haps to gain time on the clock.} ({Black would have been
happy with} 20. Rd2 h5 21. Nxc6 Qxc6 22. f5 b4 (22... a5 $5) 23. fxg6 fxg6 24.
Na4 Rf8 25. Nb6 Rf1+ 26. Rd1 Raf8 {.}) 20... Bf8 21. Qh4 b4 $1 ({Why play} 
21... Be7 {, if it is possible to launch a counterattack?!}) 22. Nxc6 $2 {A
serious mistake.} ({We both overlooked the spectacular blow} 22. Nf5 $3 {- in
the event of} bxc3 (22... gxf5 $2 23. Rh3 Bg7 24. exf5 {and wins}) ({although
after} 22... Be8 23. Rh3 h5 24. gxh6 Qd8 $1 {the chances are roughly equal})
23. Rh3 h5 24. gxh6 {White has the initiative.}) 22... Bxc6 (22... bxc3 $1 {
would have won immediately - because of the weakness of the c2-point White
loses a piece:} 23. Bd4 ({or} 23. Nd4 e5) 23... e5 24. fxe5 dxe5 25. Bxe5 cxb2+
{and ...Qxc6.}) 23. Rh3 h5 $1 24. gxh6 bxc3 $2 (24... Be7 $1 {would have won,
for example:} 25. h7+ ({or} 25. Qg3 Kh7) 25... Kh8 26. Qg3 (26. Qg4 Bf6) 26...
Bxe4 27. Bd4+ f6 {etc. Now, however, the situation becomes much sharper.}) 25.
Qf6 Kh7 26. Bd4 $1 cxb2+ ({A small plus would still have been retained by} 
26... e5 $1 27. fxe5 Qe7 {.}) 27. Kxb2 e5 28. fxe5 Bxe4 29. e6 $2 {Kengis
overrates his chances: this seemingly spectacular blow meets with a refutation.
} ({The balance would have been most easily maintained by} 29. Rf1 $1 Qxc2+ 30.
Ka1 Qd2 31. Qxf7+ Kh8 32. Qf6+ {with perpetual check (pointed out in 1996 by
the 12-year-old Serb Milos Perunovic - at that time a pupil of Nikitin).})
29... Qxc2+ 30. Ka3 d5+ 31. e7 Bxe7+ 32. Qxe7 Qc7 $1 {This strong reply 
(incidentally, the only move!) was overlooked by White: it turns out that
Black is also threatening mate - 34 Qf6? Qa5+ etc. White is forced to seek
salvation in a difficult ending.} 33. Qxc7 Rxc7 34. Rg3 {(Kengis begins acting
very enterprisingly, creating counterplay)} Rc2 35. Rf1 f5 36. h4 Kxh6 $6 {
Having decided that Black was easily winning, I relaxed.} (36... Rf8 {(g8) was
correct.}) 37. Be3+ Kh7 38. Rfg1 $6 ({The immediate} 38. h5 $1 {was more
accurate, with good drawing chances.}) 38... Rc3 39. h5 (39. Kb4 Rd3 40. h5 {
was probably more resilient, although in this case Black's moves would have
been easier to find:} Rb8+ 41. Ka5 Rdxb3 42. hxg6+ Kg8 43. Ba7 R8b5+ 44. Kxa6
f4 {etc.}) 39... g5 $2 ({Alas, in time-trouble I became frightened by ghosts
of some kind and I missed a win, which could have been achieved by} 39... Rb8
$1 40. hxg6+ Kg8 41. Bf4 Rbxb3+ 42. Ka2 Ra3+ 43. Kb2 Bd3 $1 44. Be5 Rcb3+ 45.
Kc1 d4 $1 {(from afar it is not easy to find such a move)} 46. Bxd4 Ra2 {.})
40. Bxg5 Rxg3 41. Rxg3 Rg8 42. Kb2 d4 43. Bf4 {I had thought that this too was
a winning endgame, but when Kengis offered the exchange of rooks, I belatedly
realised that the position was a draw.} Rxg3 44. Bxg3 Kh6 45. Be5 d3 46. Kc3
Kxh5 47. Kd2 Kg4 48. Ke3 Kh3 ({Black can win the bishop -} 48... f4+ 49. Bxf4
d2 50. Kxd2 Kxf4 {, but not the game: the queening square of the rook's pawn
is of the wrong colour! It was hard to accept the inevitable...}) 49. Bd4 Kg2
50. Bc3 Kf1 51. Bd2 Kg2 52. Bc3 Kg3 53. Be5+ Kg4 54. Bd6 Kg5 {. At the
conclusion of the games I received my first ever prize - 'for the youngest
player in the tournament'. But the most important result of this trip was my
meeting with Alexander Sergeevich Nikitin, state trainer of the USSR Sports
Committee - my future friend, mentor and reliable support in the most
difficult periods of my life. He became a master at a very early age and in
his youth he played for the national student team, alongside Boris Spassky.
But then, after qualifying as a radio engineer, he for a long time disappeared
from the chess scene. And yet his love for the game outweighed other things:
early in 1973 Nikitin decided to devote himself entirely to training work (and
later he developed the system of opening preparation by which we studied). ---
Nikitin: 'Playing side by side in Vilnius were 18-year-old youths and boys who
were barely visible above the chess board. That was how, through a gap in the
row of heads, on the first day I "discovered" Garik. At the board he found it
hard to maintain his composure - and he promptly lost it, no sooner had the
game ended. The childish spontaneity of his ideas merely added charm to his
array of obviously outstanding chess qualities. The ability of his pieces to
occupy "correct" positions in the most natural and rapid way was amazing. Also
amazing was his opening erudition and his memory - capacious and sticky, like
blotting-paper. He did not find it at all hard to calculate variations many
moves ahead - for him this was not difficult work, but an amusing game.
Several times during the tournament I managed to talk to this amazing boy. It
turned out that he loved reading and his range of interests was unusually wide.
He had an excellent knowledge of geographical names, historical facts and
dates. He read very rapidly, and his exceptional memory ensured that things
were firmly retained. Attempts to test his erudition often put the questioners
in an awkward position, because it would suddenly transpire that the boy knew
more than the examiner. But most of all I was staggered by Garik's eyes -
intelligent, with a kind of amazing sparkle. At the time I decided purely
intuitively that such eyes were a sign of great talent.'} (54... -- {It was
Nikitin who in August 1973 arranged an invitation for me to Dubna, to the next
session of Mikhail Botvinnik's junior school. It had opened back in 1963, the
year I was born, but at the time it did not function for long - just eighteen
months. Among its first pupils were Karpov, Balashov, Razuvaev, Timoshchenko
and Rashkovsky. The lessons were resumed in 1969, and from around the
mid-1970s Botvinnik's pupils began achieving notable successes. Two or three
times a year, some fifteen boys and girls from various towns assembled for
10-day sessions. They included Yusupov, Dolmatov, Psakhis, Akhmylovskaya,
Akhsharumova, Kharitonov, Ehlvest, Andrey Sokolov, Rozentalis, Nenashev... ---
The Kiev player Borya Taborov and I were summoned to an interview with
Botvinnik and questioned by the famous champion for a couple of hours: we
showed him our games and talked about ourselves. Mikhail Moiseevich asked his
favourite questions, such as 'do you analyse your own games?', or 'do you play
any sports?'. I remember how staggered I was when he suddenly stood up and
supported himself on a chair with just his hands! This particular example
showed what a person is capable of even at the age of 62 (however, he was
still able to do this at the age of 77). --- For some reason only one of us
was accepted into the school. I was a 10-year-old first category player,
whereas Borya was a 12-year-old candidate master, who had just won the board
six tournament at the youth games in Vilnius (7½ out of 9!). His games were,
of course, more substantial than mine, but it was I who was accepted into the
school. A symbolic event! Two years later Taborov became a master (the
youngest in the country!), played for a few more years, but then gave up chess:
his parents wanted him to go to a respectable institute, to study science...
One has to give Botvinnik's intuition its due: he lived chess and he deeply
understood and sensed all its nuances. Something about me caught his fancy -
they say, 'liveliness of mind'.}) (54... -- {Nikitin: 'The great Maestro was
delighted by the contact with Garik. He became visibly younger when chatting
with the boy, who immediately became his favourite pupil. The teacher liked
everything - the smartness of his replies combined with their accuracy, the
speed with which he calculated variations, his staggering memory... Being
enlisted as a pupil of the great Botvinnik stirred his young heart, and Garik
became even more fascinated by the ancient game. As for me, after Vilnius I
returned to my work in the chess section of the Sports Committee. But the link
with Garik was not broken: bulky parcels with chess magazines and books were
sent from Moscow to Baku, and it was a rare week when we did not have
conversations by phone.' --- To come under Botvinnik's wing was undoubtedly a
stroke of good fortune. This fact was also remarked on by the republic
newspaper Sport, which in the autumn of 1973 published an article by Valery
Asriyan, 'Ex-world champion's ten-year-old pupil'. At that same time Botvinnik
wrote a letter to the chairman of the Azerbaijan Sports Committee, where, in
particular, he gave the following directive: 'I consider it advisable to
arrange individual studies for Garry, and for him to play in tournaments with
a stronger line-up. The number of tournament games per year in the period
1973-75 should not exceed 40...' The letter had the desired effect. ---
Privorotsky: 'For two years I gave individual lessons four hours a week in
Garik's apartment. We selected positions, developed the technique of
calculating variations, studied the endgame and the opening, and so on. During
the lessons Garik always raised questions, and sometimes the answers were very
difficult to find. In such cases I promised to reply at the next lesson, and I
gave him a lot of homework which he always carried out...'}) 1/2-1/2

[Event "3: Training Match, Baku"]
[Site "?"]
[Date "1973.11.18"]
[Round "?"]
[White "Magerramov, E."]
[Black "Weinstein, G."]
[Result "0-1"]
[ECO "B84"]
[Annotator "Garry Kasparov"]
[PlyCount "70"]
[EventDate "1973.??.??"]
[Source "Everyman Chess"]
[SourceDate "2012.11.28"]

{Lessons with Alexander Shakarov also continued - for the moment not
individual, but group lessons, as part of the junior team. Thus at the age of
ten and a half I had a full program of commitments, and soon I went to the
Pioneers Palace only to play blitz with the older lads and with my first
teacher, or to play training games. --- One of these games became, as Nikitin
expressed it, 'another high-quality chess canvas, painted by a youthful hand'.
My opponent Elmar Magerramov was five years older than me, but this did not
prevent us being friends. In the 1970s we played numerous training games, in
which there was always a sharp, uncompromising fight. Gradually Elmar
developed into a strong master, and then also a grandmaster - I should remind
you that he shared 1st-2nd places in the last, 58th USSR Championship (1991).} 
1. e4 c5 2. Nc3 e6 3. Nf3 Nc6 4. d4 cxd4 5. Nxd4 d6 6. Be3 Nf6 7. Be2 a6 {My
first experience of the classical Scheveningen, which Privorotsky taught me -
it was his favourite defence, along with 2...Nc6 3 d4 cxd4 4 Nxd4 Nf6 5 Nc3 d6
(Game No.6). My trainer quite reasonably assumed that two central pawns
against one was a good basis for Black, promising him a favourable endgame.
Nikitin was also a Scheveningen devotee, so that this set-up remained with me
for ever.} 8. f4 Be7 9. O-O Bd7 {A little trick, which I had learned at the
lessons: Black immediately creates the threat of simplifying by ...Nxd4 and ...Bc6.} ({After the usual} 9... O-O 10. a4 Bd7 11. Nb3 {he does not have the
reply ...b7-b5.}) 10. Nb3 $6 (10. a4 {is nevertheless better, and if} Nxd4 11.
Qxd4 Bc6 {, then} 12. b4 $1 {(in the 1970s this was not considered)} O-O 13. b5
Be8 14. e5 {(an example: Grischuk-Rublevsky, 1st match game, Elista 2007).})
10... b5 {Now Black is completely alright.} 11. Bf3 Qc7 12. a3 (12. a4 $5 {is
perhaps safer, in order after} b4 {to maintain the balance by} 13. Ne2 ({or} 
13. Nb1 O-O 14. Qd3 e5 15. f5 Rfc8 16. N1d2) 13... e5 14. f5 Na5 15. Nxa5 Qxa5
16. c4 {.}) 12... Rb8 ({The position after} 12... O-O $1 {is the dream of any
Sicilian player. But I decided to launch an immediate attack and I could have
been made to pay for this.}) 13. Qe1 a5 14. Qg3 a4 $6 ({Again} 14... O-O $1 {
was more sensible.}) 15. Nd4 Nxd4 16. Bxd4 b4 $2 ({And here} 16... O-O {was
simply essential, although after} 17. e5 {White has the initiative (and it was
not for the sake of this that I embarked on the attack!).}) 17. axb4 $2 ({
Elmar also missed the typical stroke} 17. e5 $1 {, refuting Black's premature
aggression.} -- ({. We both overlooked that after} 17... bxc3 $2 {White has
the decisive} 18. Qxg7 {with the pretty idea} Rg8 19. exf6 $3 Rxg7 20. fxg7 {.}
) (17... dxe5 {is also hopeless:} 18. fxe5 Bc5 (18... bxc3 19. Qxg7) ({or} 
18... g6 19. exf6 Bd6 20. Qh4 bxc3 21. Bxc3) 19. Ne2 bxa3 20. bxa3 {.})) 17...
Rxb4 18. Ne2 $6 {Again passive (it appears that Elmar was slightly afraid of
me).} ({The} 18. e5 $1 {break would have still enabled White to fight for the
initiative:} dxe5 19. fxe5 Rxd4 20. Qxg7 Rf8 21. exf6 Qe5 22. Ne4 $5 Rxe4 23.
Bxe4 Bc5+ 24. Kh1 Qxe4 25. Qg3 $1 {etc.}) 18... O-O {At last!} 19. Bc3 ({Now
there is no longer any point in} 19. e5 dxe5 20. fxe5 Nd5 {.}) 19... Rc4 20. e5
$6 {At the most inappropriate moment!} (20. Rfd1 g6 21. Rd4 {was more solid,
aiming to exchange the active black rook.}) 20... dxe5 21. fxe5 $6 ({The
lesser evil was} 21. Bxe5 Qb6+ 22. Kh1 Rxc2 23. Nc3 {with some compensation
for the pawn.}) 21... Nd5 $6 (21... Ne4 $1 22. Bxe4 Rxe4 23. Nf4 Qc4 $1 {(and
if} 24. Nh5 Rg4 {) would have given me an obvious advantage.}) 22. Bxd5 Qc5+ ({
Not wishing to spoil my pawn structure by} 22... exd5 $5 {.}) 23. Kh1 Qxd5 24.
Nf4 $6 {This plays into Black's hands;} ({although all the same his chances
would have been better after} 24. Rad1 Qb7 25. Nd4 Bb4) ({or} 24. Rfd1 Qb7 25.
Nf4 Kh8 26. Nh5 Rg8 {.}) 24... Qe4 $1 25. Rae1 (25. Qd3 Bb5 $1 {.}) 25... Qxc2
26. Rf2 Qf5 $2 {Underestimating the opponent's threats.} ({After} 26... Qb3 $5
{White would not have had sufficient compensation for the pawn:} 27. Nh5 g6 28.
Nf6+ Bxf6 29. exf6 h6 $1 {.}) 27. Ref1 $2 {The losing move.} (27. Nd5 $1 {
would have equalised} -- ({; after} 27... Qg5 {(?) we both missed the strong
reply} 28. Bd2 $1 {, when after} Qh4 29. Nxe7+ Qxe7 30. Bh6 g6 (30... f6 $2 31.
exf6 Rxf6 32. Bg5) 31. Bxf8 Qxf8 32. Qg5 {Black is in difficulties.}) ({. I
don't know whether I would have found the saving queen sacrifice:} 27... exd5
$1 28. e6 $1 Rxc3 $1 29. bxc3 Qxe6 30. Rxe6 Bxe6 {with a probable draw.}))
27... Bc5 $1 28. Rd2 Bc6 (28... Bb5 {with the threat of ...Rxc3 was also good.
The bishops have begun operating at full power, and Black has not only an
extra pawn, but also a menacing attack. It was possibly under the influence of
this game that Elmar, as far as I remember, never played 1 e4 again...}) 29.
Rdd1 ({If} 29. h4 {the most unpleasant is} Re4 $1 {.}) 29... h5 $5 {(I could
have won 'as I pleased', but I had my own plan, based on a deep calculation)}
30. h3 ({If} 30. Nd3 {, then} h4 $1 31. Rxf5 hxg3 32. Rg5 (32. Rff1 $2 Rh4 $1)
32... Bf2 $1 33. hxg3 Be3 $1 {and ...a4-a3.}) 30... h4 $1 31. Qh2 ({Of course,
not} 31. Qxh4 $2 g5 $1 {. 'Very few at such a young age could conceive the
idea of such a pawn storm: ...h7-h5, and then also ...g7-g5' (Nikitin).}) 31...
Qg5 (31... Qc2 $1 {was more forceful.}) 32. Nd3 (32. Bd2 Qf5 {.}) 32... Bd4 33.
Rf4 Rd8 34. Rdf1 (34. Rg4 Qe3 35. Ne1 Rxc3 36. bxc3 Bb6 {etc. was also
hopeless.}) 34... Rd7 (34... a3 $5 {.}) 35. Be1 Bxe5 ({Or} 35... Rc2 $5 {. But,
as it was, White resigned --- In December, just four months after the first
session of the Botvinnik School, I achieved the candidate master norm, scoring
8 out of 14 in an interesting double-round tournament held on the Scheveningen
system: seven candidate master trainers (including Shakarov) against the seven
best junior first category players. We again played in the club attached to
the Veten cinema - this was one of the training points of the special-purpose
chess school, where lessons were held, as well as competitions with the
participation of the republic junior teams. --- That was how 1973 concluded -
a year which was undoubtedly a turning point in my chess career: first success
in junior chess, a place in the Azerbaijan junior team, emergence into the
all-union arena, and acquaintance with the Moscow trainer Alexander Nikitin
and the great Botvinnik!}) 0-1

[Event "?"]
[Site "?"]
[Date "????.??.??"]
[Round "?"]
[White "'He attacks like Alekhine!'"]
[Black "?"]
[Result "*"]
[Annotator "Garry Kasparov"]
[PlyCount "1"]
[EventDate "1984.??.??"]
[SourceDate "2012.12.06"]

{The following year, 1974, began for me with a fresh victory. In January the
team from the Baku Pioneers Palace won the qualifying stage in Kiev for the
prize of the newspaper 'Komsomolskaya pravda', and on board 2 I scored 4½
out of 5. The home team from Kiev were considered the favourites, and they did
indeed defeat all their rivals, including us - 4-3 (that day I made my only
draw). But in the end, thanks to big wins in our remaining matches, we
finished ahead of the Kiev team by 4 points! To many this seemed incredible
luck: the strength of our 'magnificent seven' (which apart from me included
Korsunsky, Magerramov, and Elena Glaz) was clearly underestimated. --- The
final of the All-Union Tournament of Pioneers Palaces took place from 25-31
March in Moscow. Six teams contested an unusual competition: they did not play
against one another, but in daily simultaneous displays with grandmasters -
the captains of the rival teams. The points scored by the team and the captain
were added together, which determined the result of each 'match'. I remember
that Privorotsky prepared us for this test and advised us to make a careful
study of a small brochure published in Moscow, dedicated to the previous final
(1972). There it was described how Zaid won against Petrosian, Dvoyris against
Spassky, and so on. The trainer said that we had to try and understand how to
play against grandmasters. --- Nikitin: 'In these clock simuls' on seven
boards (six boys and one girl) the grandmasters sometimes had a very hard time
of it. Although they did not play one another and it was only the totals of
their simul' results that were compared, the habit of being first forced the
grandmasters to fight just as in the most prestigious tournament. But for the
youngsters playing in these simuls' it was not so much the result that was
important, but rather the invaluable experience and the impression left by
their formidable opponents.'} 1. -- {On the very first day I experienced a
severe shock, on seeing in front of me a living legend - Mikhail Tal! I could
even shake his hand! I had heard about his intimidating, hypnotic glare with
which he would fix his opponents. True, to overcome me, Tal did not need this... Later, largely under the impression of these feelings, I considered it my
direct duty to take part in these 'tournaments of chess hopes' (as the Pioneer
Palace tournaments were rightly known), as captain of the Baku team, since I
realised how important it was for young players to meet renowned grandmasters
at the board. --- I also failed to cope with my excitement in the 2nd round,
losing to Lev Polugayevsky (whereas Rostik Korsunsky, by contrast, won both
games!). Then I adjourned my game with Yuri Averbakh in a not altogether clear
queen ending with an extra pawn; at these tournaments adjourned games were not
resumed, but were adjudicated by a grandmaster panel, and at the insistence of
our captain Vladimir Bagirov I was awarded a win. In the 4th round came a draw
with Gennady Kuzmin, after which my opponent declared to a reporter: 'It never
occurred to me that a 10-year-old boy could play the endgame so competently.'
Alas, at the finish I lost 'stupidly' to Mark Taimanov and finished up with 1½ out of 5. --- Nevertheless the prominent Moscow journalist Alexander Roshal
drew attention to me: 'It should be said that playing in the Baku team is one
of our most interesting young players. Garry Weinstein is only 10 years old,
but he (like his older colleague Korsunsky) has already achieved the candidate
master norm. Botvinnik, in whose school the boy studies, speaks highly of his
capabilities; national master Dvoretsky, the ex-world champion's assistant, is
also delighted by the youngster. We will not hurry to draw conclusions, which
may harm the young player, but comment that whereas Tal and Polugayevsky
managed to outwit the 10-year-old in complications, Averbakh lost to him!
Curiously, when I asked him whether it was a good game that he had won against
the grandmaster, Garik Weinstein replied: "No, no! Yuri Lvovich simply
blundered a pawn in the opening..."} (1. -- {The tournament was confidently
won by the Leningrad team, who together with Taimanov scored 42½ out of 70,
ahead of Moscow with Averbakh and Chernovtsy with Kuzmin (both 34), Riga with
Tal (33½), Baku with Bagirov and Chelyabinsk with Polugayevsky (both 33).
--- These battles earned the Baku players respect. At the All-Union
Schoolchildren's Spartakiad (Alma-Ata, July 1974) the Azerbaijan team, for
which I played on board 3, reached the main final for the first time and
finished in an honourable 4th place! But we could even have won the bronze
medals, had Korsunsky and I not both lost in the final match with Georgia...
And in general I did not perform very successfully: I started with 3 out of 3,
but then in my game with the Muscovite Baryshev, after obtaining a completely
won endgame, I overlooked an elementary draw - and either through vexation or
fatigue my play sharply declined at the finish (which, however, was excusable
for the youngest player in the tournament).}) (1. -- {During the previous
months I had also attended two sessions of the Botvinnik school. Nikitin:
'Lessons at the school run by Botvinnik, who at that time was helped by the
splendid instructor Mark Dvoretsky, brought much benefit, since the boy had
sufficient time for the homework he was set. I also continued setting him
questions, and Garik not only succeeded in solving all the problems, but even
asked for more. His mother wrote to me, saying that sometimes she had to
forcibly tear her son away from chess. I was afraid of putting too much early
psychological pressure on Garik, and the exercises sent by me were never
obligatory.' --- From the autumn of 1974 I began playing in Baku team
tournaments, as chess life in the city was bubbling over. And I sensed that
adults were already a little afraid of me. Appearing on board 2 for the
Pioneers Palace team in the City Spartakiad, I scored 5 out of 7, and,
moreover, I missed a win in a very interesting endgame with Velibekov of the
Burevestnik team (in adjournment analysis Bagirov found a miraculous saving
line for my opponent).}) *

[Event "4: City Spartakiad, Baku"]
[Site "?"]
[Date "1974.09.17"]
[Round "3"]
[White "Sarkisov, R."]
[Black "Weinstein, G."]
[Result "0-1"]
[ECO "E90"]
[Annotator "Garry Kasparov"]
[PlyCount "70"]
[EventDate "1973.??.??"]
[Source "Everyman Chess"]
[SourceDate "2012.11.28"]

{Also memorable for me was the game with Rafael Grigorievich Sarkisov, the
Spartak junior trainer (incidentally, this team was headed by Shakarov, who
battled on the neighbouring board with Korsunsky). It displayed my natural
inclination for Benko-King's Indian positions.} 1. d4 Nf6 2. Nf3 g6 3. c4 Bg7
4. Nc3 O-O 5. e4 d6 6. Bg5 {A way of getting away from theory.} c5 (6... h6 {
is also good, but I was seized with the idea of undermining the queenside,
even at the cost of a pawn.}) 7. d5 a6 8. Bd3 b5 9. cxb5 axb5 10. Nxb5 (10.
Bxb5 $2 {is weak in view of} Nxe4 $1 {.}) 10... c4 $1 {I was also to make
successful use of this idea in a game against Hernandez (Banja Luka 1979).} 11.
Bc2 (11. Bxc4 $6 Nxe4 $1 {.}) 11... Qa5+ 12. Nc3 Bg4 $1 {In order to exchange
this inactive bishop for the knight on f3 and create pressure on the b-file.}
13. O-O Nbd7 14. h3 Bxf3 15. Qxf3 Rfb8 16. Rab1 {For the moment White has a
sound position, but also Black's chances are no worse than in the Benko
Gambit.} Ra7 17. Qe2 ({Or} 17. a4 Nc5 18. Qe2 Rab7 {.}) 17... Rab7 18. Qxc4 (
18. Na4 $5 {.}) 18... Rb4 $1 19. Qd3 Nc5 20. Qe3 Rxb2 21. Rxb2 $2 {A mistake.}
({Approximate equality would have been maintained by} 21. Bb3) ({or} 21. e5 {.}
) 21... Rxb2 22. Bb1 $6 {This aggravates White's difficulties;} (22. e5) ({or} 
22. Bd1 {was more resilient.}) 22... h6 ({The alternative} 22... Ne8 $5 23. e5
Bxe5 24. Ne4 Nc7 {would also have given a big advantage.}) 23. Qc1 ({
Resistance would have been prolonged by} 23. e5 hxg5 24. exf6 Bxf6 25. Ne4 Nxe4
26. Qxe4 Qc5 {.}) 23... Rxb1 24. Qxb1 hxg5 $1 ({More vigorous than} 24... Qxc3
{.}) 25. Rc1 g4 (25... Nfd7 {was also good.}) 26. Qb5 (26. e5 Nfd7 {and wins.})
26... Qa3 27. Rc2 gxh3 28. gxh3 $6 Nfd7 $1 29. Qc4 Ne5 (29... Nb6 $1 {.}) 30.
Qe2 Ned3 31. Nd1 Nf4 32. Qe3 Qa4 33. Rd2 Be5 34. Nc3 Bxc3 $1 35. Qxc3 Qxe4 {. 
Times: 1.20-0.50.} 0-1

[Event "5: Baku"]
[Site "?"]
[Date "1974.11.25"]
[Round "?"]
[White "Gazarian, V."]
[Black "Weinstein, G."]
[Result "0-1"]
[ECO "D86"]
[Annotator "Garry Kasparov"]
[PlyCount "112"]
[EventDate "1973.??.??"]
[Source "Everyman Chess"]
[SourceDate "2012.11.28"]

{Then I played for my own, 151st school in the Baku Schools Team Championship.
On this occasion in this normally weak event there were also candidate masters
competing. My opponent in the next game, Viktor Gazarian, playing for the 42nd
school, was a pupil of Shakarov (who worked there as a trainer and teacher),
and later was to become a member of the national Azerbaijan junior team.} 1. d4
Nf6 2. c4 g6 3. Nc3 d5 {My sole junior experience of employing the Grünfeld.}
4. cxd5 Nxd5 5. e4 Nxc3 6. bxc3 Bg7 7. Bc4 (7. Nf3 {- Game Nos.38, 48.}) 7...
O-O 8. Ne2 (8. Be3 {- Game No.72.}) 8... b6 ({I was always attracted by
fianchettoed bishops, and this set-up (instead of the usual} 8... c5 {) was
one that I copied from either Smyslov or Simagin. But in general at that time
I had only vague notions about the Grünfeld Defence, and I handled it rather
uncertainly.}) 9. O-O Bb7 10. f3 Nc6 ({Smyslov nevertheless played} 10... c5 {.
}) 11. Be3 e6 ({And Simagin} 11... Na5 {.}) 12. Qd2 Re8 {With the
'uncompromising' idea 13 Bh6 Bh8.} 13. Rfd1 Qd6 14. Rac1 Rad8 15. Bf4 Qe7 16.
Bg5 f6 17. Be3 Na5 18. Bb5 c6 19. Bd3 c5 20. Bb5 Rf8 21. Qb2 f5 $1 {Thanks to
his opponent's rather slow play, Black has achieved a good game.} 22. e5 c4 $6
(22... a6 $1 23. Bd3 b5 {was correct, with equality.}) 23. Qb4 $1 Qc7 $6 ({Not
wanting to go into a depressing end-game (} 23... Qxb4 24. cxb4 {)}) ({or to
give up a pawn (} 23... Qf7 24. Bxc4 {).}) 24. Bg5 a6 {A Petrosian-style
positional exchange sacrifice!} 25. Bxd8 $2 {The culmination of the battle.} ({
We both overlooked the strong reply} 25. Nf4 $1 {, when both} axb5 ({and} 25...
Kf7 26. d5) 26. Nxe6 Qc8 27. Nxd8 Rxd8 28. Bxd8 Qxd8 29. Qxb5 {are dismal for
Black.}) 25... Rxd8 26. Ba4 ({Here} 26. Nf4 Kf7 27. d5 ({or} 27. Ba4 b5 28. Bc2
Bh6 {etc}) {, no longer gave anything in view of} 27... exd5 28. e6+ Kf6 $1 {.}
) 26... b5 27. Bc2 Bh6 $1 {Now my idea completely justifies itself: Black is
able to exploit the power of his bishops and his knight on the d5 blockading
square.} 28. Rb1 Nc6 29. Qb2 Ne7 30. a4 Bc6 31. axb5 axb5 32. Ra1 Qb7 33. Kf2
$2 (33. Rf1 Nd5 34. Ra5 {was correct, still hoping to maintain the balance.})
33... Nd5 34. Ra2 $2 {(a blunder in a difficult position)} Qe7 $2 (34... Be3+
$1 35. Kf1 Qe7 36. g3 Qg5 {and ...Qh5 would have been quickly decisive.}) 35.
g3 $2 ({The king should have been urgently brought back 'to base' -} 35. Kg1 {
, although after} Qh4 36. Rf1 Ne3 {the initiative would have remained with
Black.}) 35... Qg5 36. f4 Qh5 37. h4 (37. Rg1 Qxh2+ 38. Rg2 Qh5 {was also
hopeless.}) 37... Bxf4 $1 38. Nxf4 Nxf4 39. gxf4 Qxh4+ {The attack on the
light squares is irresistible.} 40. Kf1 Qh1+ 41. Kf2 Qg2+ 42. Ke3 Qg3+ 43. Kd2
Qxf4+ 44. Ke1 Qe3+ 45. Kf1 Qh3+ 46. Ke1 Qh4+ 47. Kd2 Qf4+ 48. Ke1 Bf3 49. Ba4
bxa4 50. Rd2 Qh4+ 51. Rf2 Qe4+ 52. Kf1 Qd3+ 53. Kg1 Be4 54. Qd2 Qg3+ 55. Kf1
Bd3+ 56. Re2 Rb8 0-1

[Event "6: Azerbaijan Spartakiad, Baku"]
[Site "?"]
[Date "1974.12.04"]
[Round "1"]
[White "Sarkisov, R."]
[Black "Weinstein, G."]
[Result "0-1"]
[ECO "B56"]
[Annotator "Garry Kasparov"]
[PlyCount "78"]
[EventDate "1973.??.??"]
[Source "Everyman Chess"]
[SourceDate "2012.11.28"]

{The year concluded with the Azerbaijan Spartakiad, which differed little from
the City Spartakiad: the teams consisted largely of the same Baku players (it
was simply that these competitions were staged by different sports committees
- city and republic). I again played on board 2 for the Pioneers Palace and
started with 4½ out of 5, beginning with an amusing game which abounded in
mutual tactical strokes and mistakes.} 1. e4 c5 2. Nf3 Nc6 3. d4 cxd4 4. Nxd4
Nf6 5. Nc3 d6 6. f4 ({After} 6. Bg5 {Privorotsky showed us the variation} e6 7.
Qd2 a6 8. O-O-O Bd7 9. f4 h6 10. Bh4 Nxe4 {, which I employed against Polonsky
(Kiev 1974).}) 6... Bd7 7. Nb3 $6 {Sarkisov was not strong on theory and he
again played the opening unpretentiously.} g6 {At that time I fianchettoed my
bishop at the slightest opportunity.} 8. Bd3 (8. Be2 Bg7 9. Be3 {and 0-0 was
more purposeful.}) 8... Bg7 9. O-O O-O 10. Kh1 a6 11. a4 Na5 $1 {Enterprising
play: I already had a good knowledge of Black's various 'Sicilian manoeuvres'.}
12. Nxa5 Qxa5 13. Qe1 (13. Bd2 Qc5 {.}) 13... b5 $1 {This sharp attack
confused my opponent, and he thought that I had overlooked a typical
combination.} 14. Nd5 Qxe1 15. Nxe7+ $2 {Strangely enough, the decisive
mistake.} ({In the event of} 15. Rxe1 bxa4 16. Nxe7+ Kh8 17. Nd5 Nxd5 18. exd5
Rfe8 {Black would merely have had somewhat the better chances.}) 15... Kh8 16.
Rxe1 Rfe8 $2 {An error in reply;} ({after} 16... Rae8 $1 17. axb5 axb5 18.
Nxg6+ fxg6 19. Ra6 Re6 {White would not have had sufficient compensation for
the piece.}) 17. axb5 Rxe7 18. Rxa6 {And this is already a double-edged
position.} Rxa6 $2 (18... Rae8 {(b8) was correct, with favourable prospects.})
19. bxa6 Bc6 20. e5 Nd5 21. Bd2 dxe5 22. c4 $2 {And now White loses his
advantage;} ({which he would have retained after} 22. fxe5 {(after all, he has
three connected passed pawns!), and he again finds himself on the verge of
defeat.}) 22... Nc7 {The a6-pawn is under attack, and also the bishops on the
d-file are hanging.} 23. b4 $2 (23. Bf1 {was more resilient.}) 23... Nxa6 $2 (
23... Rd7 {would have won, but I saw a combinative blow that was possible in
three moves time and I could not refrain from capturing the a6-pawn. I quickly
calculated a variation - and promptly rattled it off!}) 24. b5 Nc5 $6 ({Here
too} 24... Rd7 $1 {was better.}) 25. Bb4 $2 ({Overlooking the excellent latent
resource} 25. bxc6 $1 Nxd3 26. Rb1 $1 {with equality.}) 25... Nxd3 26. Bxe7
Bxg2+ $1 27. Kxg2 Nxe1+ 28. Kf1 $6 (28. Kg3 {is not so clear.}) 28... Nf3 29.
b6 Nd4 30. f5 $2 ({The immediate} 30. b7 Nc6 31. Bd6 {is stronger, but after}
e4 $1 32. b8=Q+ Nxb8 33. Bxb8 Kg8 34. c5 Kf8 {Black has a won endgame: his
king succeeds in stopping the passed c-pawn.}) 30... gxf5 31. b7 Nc6 32. Bd6 e4
33. b8=Q+ Nxb8 34. Bxb8 Bd4 35. Bd6 Kg7 36. c5 Kf6 37. c6 Ke6 38. Bf4 f6 39.
Bb8 Be5 0-1

[Event "7: Azerbaijan Spartakiad, Baku"]
[Site "?"]
[Date "1974.12.11"]
[Round "7"]
[White "Weinstein, G."]
[Black "Privorotsky, O."]
[Result "1-0"]
[ECO "B50"]
[Annotator "Garry Kasparov"]
[PlyCount "75"]
[EventDate "1973.??.??"]
[Source "Everyman Chess"]
[SourceDate "2012.11.28"]

{But in the 6th round I lost to the strong candidate master Karo Askarian, and
he overtook me by half a point. Now, in order to fight for the best result on
my board, I had to win 'to order' in the 7th, last round. --- And here our
match opponents. the Burevestnik team, made a substitution, and put out
against me their reserve player - Oleg Privorotsky! I don't know, perhaps my
first trainer had decided to relive the good old days and give me a 'farewell'
lesson? At any event, initially he did indeed outplay me. But he faltered as
soon as I was able to complicate the play.} 1. e4 c5 2. Nf3 e6 3. b3 {Avoiding
my opponent's favourite weapon - the Scheveningen.} Nc6 ({If} 3... Nf6 {I
would have replied} 4. e5 {, following the familiar game Westerinen-Tal 
(Tallinn 1973).}) 4. Bb2 d6 {I was already confused by this move.} 5. g3 $6 (5.
d4 $1 {is more energetic, as occurred in the ancient game
Kieseritzky-Anderssen (London 1851). But - I liked fianchettoing my bishops!})
5... Nf6 6. Qe2 {A loss of time.} ({The immediate} 6. d3 {was better, in the
spirit of the King's Indian Attack (although the moves b2-b3 and Bb2 do not
fit in well with it).}) 6... Be7 7. Bg2 O-O 8. O-O Bd7 ({The immediate} 8... e5
$5 {was more accurate.}) 9. d3 e5 $1 10. c4 $6 (10. c3 {was preferable, trying
for d3-d4 (at least this would somehow justify 6 Qe2). Now Black has slightly
the better game.}) 10... Bg4 11. h3 Bxf3 ({Hardly any stronger was} 11... Nd4
12. Bxd4 Bxf3 13. Bxf3 cxd4 14. Nd2 ({or} 14. a4 {.})) 12. Bxf3 a6 13. Bg2 Nd7
14. Nd2 b5 {(the correct plan)} 15. f4 ({It was quite possible to manage
without this thrust:} 15. h4 Nd4 16. Qd1 {, intending the manoeuvre of the
knight to e3 and d5. But I was dreaming of an attack!}) 15... Bf6 16. Nf3 b4 {
Not the best move: it was more advantageous for Black to retain the pawn
tension, threatening a possible ...b5xc4.} 17. f5 a5 18. a4 $1 {Suppressing
the threat of ...a5-a4.} bxa3 ({With the queenside blocked White has nothing
to fear, for example:} 18... Nd4 19. Bxd4 cxd4 20. h4 $1 {(depriving the black
bishop of the g5-square)} Nc5 21. Nd2 {.}) 19. Rxa3 Nd4 20. Bxd4 (20. Qd2 $1
Qb6 21. Bc3 {was sounder, with equality.}) 20... cxd4 21. h4 $6 ({The immediate
} 21. Rfa1 {was more accurate, with the idea of b3-b4 and the inevitable
exchange of the a- and b-pawns. Here White would probably have maintained the
balance.}) 21... Nc5 22. Rfa1 $6 {With a delay, alas.} ({It would appear that
already I needed to go in for extreme measures:} 22. Nxd4 $5 exd4 23. e5 Bxe5
24. Bxa8 Qxa8 25. b4 $1 {with sharp play.}) 22... Qb6 {Now White has a
difficult position: he does not manage either to capture on a5, or to create
an attack on the kingside.} 23. g4 $6 {A desperate pawn sacrifice with the aim
of complicating the play.} Rfb8 $6 ({Stronger was} 23... Nxb3 24. Qb2 (24. Rb1
a4) 24... Rfb8) ({or} 23... Be7 24. g5 (24. Rb1 Qb4 $1) 24... Nxb3 {with an
obvious advantage.}) 24. g5 Bd8 {An interesting psychological moment:
Privorotsky removes all his pieces to the queenside, demonstrating his faith
in his own attack and his lack of faith in White's counterattack.} 25. Rf1 $6 (
{Objectively} 25. Nd2 Qb4 26. Bf1 {was far more resilient, but that was not in
my style! 'White's timidity in the first half of the game can be explained by
the natural restraint of a boy, playing against an adult, indeed against his
teacher. One should not forget about the colossal psychological pressure on
the boy. Garik cast off the shackles only at the instant when the threat of
defeat was finally hanging over him.' (Nikitin)}) 25... Qb4 26. Ra2 Qxb3 27.
Rd2 ({White would not have been saved by} 27. Nxd4 exd4 28. e5 Nxd3 29. Bxa8
Nf4 $1 {etc. Here Privorotsky stopped to think: how best to neutralise the
threat of g5-g6 and convert his material advantage?}) 27... f6 ({The most
vigorous was} 27... a4 $1 {and only after} 28. g6 {-} f6 29. gxh7+ Kh8 $1 {
with the ideas of ...a4-a3 and ...Ba5. The move in the game gives White a
ghost of a chance.}) 28. Nh2 $1 {My steadily growing King's Indian experience
came into action: I immediately saw the attacking scheme - Nh2, Qh5, Ng4, Bf3
and Rg2. Of course, nothing should have come of this, but - it did!} a4 29. Qh5
{And at this moment, on seeing that the situation was beginning to become
sharper, my teacher unexpectedly panicked...} Be7 $2 {By instinctively wanting
somehow to reinforce the defence, Black throws away the win.} ({After the
fearless} 29... Ba5 $1 30. Rdd1 Nxd3 31. gxf6 Rb7 $1 {White's attack would
have petered out.}) 30. Ng4 {With the threat of 31 g6!.} Nd7 $2 {A
catastrophic mistake: the knight and bishop have blocked the 7th rank and the
black rooks are unable to come to the aid of their king. Indeed, they were
called on to defend the 7th rank (Capablanca's principle!), while on c5 the
knight was carrying out an important function - it was attacking the d3-pawn.}
(30... Ra7 $1 {was essential.} 31. -- ({. Now the hasty} 31. g6 $2 h6 32. Nxh6+
gxh6 33. g7 {is bad because of} Bf8 $1 34. gxf8=Q+ Rxf8 {.}) ({. However, after
} 31. Bf3 $1 {the attack is good enough for at least a draw:} -- (31... Nxd3
32. g6 h6 33. Nxh6+ gxh6 34. g7 $1 Nc5 (34... Bf8 {with a draw}) 35. Re1 ({or} 
35. Re2 {, and the threat of Qxh6 forces} Bf8 {with a draw})) (31... Bf8 32.
gxf6 $1 Kh8 33. fxg7+ Rxg7 34. f6 Rg8 35. f7 Rg6 36. Rg2 Qxd3 37. Nf6 $1 Qe3+
38. Kh1 Qh6 39. Rfg1 $1 Kg7 $1 40. Ne8+ $1 Kxf7 41. Nxd6+ Bxd6 42. Rxg6 Qxh5
43. Rg7+ Kf6 44. Bxh5 Rb7 45. Rg8 {with a draw.}) ({. If} 31... Rf8 $2 {, then}
32. g6 h6 33. Kh2 $1 {is very unpleasant.}))) 31. Bf3 $1 {Now both g5-g6 and
Rg2 are threatened.} Qc3 ({Black would no longer have been saved by either} 
31... Kh8 32. g6 $1 Nf8 33. Nh6 $3) ({or} 31... a3 32. g6 $1 Nf8 33. Nh6+ $1
gxh6 34. Rg2 $1 hxg6 35. Rxg6+ Nxg6 36. Qxg6+ Kh8 37. Qxh6+ Kg8 38. Qg6+ Kh8
39. Kh1 Qb1 40. Bd1 {with unavoidable mate}) ({or even the most resilient} 
31... Bf8 $1 32. Rg2 $1 Kh8 33. gxf6 a3 $1 34. Qf7 Rb7 35. Bd1 $1 Qb6 $1 36.
Nh6 $1 Nxf6 37. Qxf6 $3 d5 $1 38. Nf7+ Kg8 39. Qe6 $1 Qxe6 40. fxe6 dxc4 41.
Ba4 $1 Rc7 42. dxc4 {, and White should convert his extra piece without
particular problems (if} Bc5 ({or} 42... d3 {, then} 43. Bb3 $1 {).})) 32. g6
$1 ({Privorotsky underestimated this thrust: he was hoping to repel the
assault after} 32. Rg2 $2 Rb2 $1 {.}) 32... Nf8 (32... hxg6 33. Nh6+ $1 {would
have led to mate.}) ({And after} 32... h6 33. Nxh6+ $1 gxh6 34. Qxh6 Nf8 {
White wins by} 35. g7 ({although the immediate} 35. Bh5) ({or} 35. Rfd1 $1 {is
simpler}) 35... Nh7 36. Bh5) 33. Nh6+ $1 ({Or first} 33. Rg2 $1 {is also good.}
) 33... Kh8 ({In the event of} 33... gxh6 34. Rg2 $1 hxg6 (34... Rb2 35. gxh7+)
35. Rxg6+ $1 Nxg6 36. Qxg6+ {White would have given mate:} Kf8 ({or} 36... Kh8
37. Qxh6+ Kg8 38. Qg6+ Kh8 39. Kh1 $1 Qd2 40. Rg1) 37. Bh5 $1 {(the decisive
blow is struck by this 'blunt' bishop, which has been inactive for the entire
game).}) 34. Nf7+ Kg8 35. gxh7+ Nxh7 36. Rg2 $1 {The finishing touch.
'Nevertheless David outwitted Goliath' (Nikitin).} Qxd3 ({Or} 36... Rb2 37.
Rxg7+ $1 Kxg7 38. Qg6+ Kf8 39. Nh6 {.}) 37. Nh6+ $1 Kh8 38. Rxg7 $1 {Black
lost on time.} ({After} 38. Rxg7 Rg8 39. Nxg8 Kxg7 40. Nxe7 {White's threats
are irresistible. 'A splendid finish, disclosing the strong features of the
future world champion' (Nikitin). Times: 1.45-2.00.}) (38. -- {The final
attack made a big impression on those present, and I was terribly proud of
this win. But when I showed the entire game at the Botvinnik School, I was
rightly criticised by both Botvinnik and Dvoretsky for my 'disgraceful play'
in the opening and early middlegame. --- A year later in a match with
Burevestnik I had one more duel with Privorotsky (I was now playing on board 1,
and on this occasion Bagirov avoided meeting me). This was a crucial battle:
my first trainer was eager for revenge, especially as he had the white pieces.
But I again won, and at that our 'confrontation' came to an end. --- From the
memoirs of an eye-witness - Valery Asriyan: 'Garik's mastery developed
amazingly quickly. One was struck by his astounding combinative talent.
Already then he attacked with enormous power, and he calculated variations
uncommonly quickly and very deeply, astonishing all the Baku players,
including his trainer. In the mid-1970s Garik twice defeated Privorotsky in
team competitions, with both games following one and the same course. In a
positional struggle the trainer outplayed the pupil and began active measures
on the queenside, but Garik succeeded in developing a strong attack against
the opponent's king, which Oleg was unable to parry: Kasparov was already too
strong in such assaults. After the games Privorotsky could only spread his
hands: "What can I do, if he attacks like Alekhine!".'}) 1-0

[Event "?"]
[Site "?"]
[Date "????.??.??"]
[Round "?"]
[White "Who will be the next Champion?"]
[Black "?"]
[Result "*"]
[Annotator "Garry Kasparov"]
[PlyCount "1"]
[EventDate "1984.??.??"]
[SourceDate "2012.12.06"]

{In January 1975 Magerramov and I were dispatched to Vilnius to the USSR
Junior (under-18) Championship - our first individual competition of this
standard. Among the thirty-six participants in this Swiss event were at least
a dozen future grandmasters, and the tournament was won 'with obvious
superiority' by the almost 18-year-old Alma-Ata master Evgeny Vladimirov 
(later one of my seconds). --- I made a stunning start - 3 out of 3! Moreover,
in the 2nd round I beat the Kiev player V.Sokolov, who in the end shared
2nd-3rd places. But in the 4th round I suddenly lost without a fight to
Yurtaev (cf. Game No.13, note to Black's 18th move). In the 5th round I made a
confident draw with Black against Vladimirov, and in the 6th, after passing
through a lost position, I overcame Gorelov. In the 7th round I had a peaceful
encounter with Kengis (after 1 e4 c5 2 Nf3 d6 I played 3 Bb5+), and in the
penultimate, 8th round, by contrast, a sharp, gripping duel with Dvoyris - but
again a draw.} 1. -- {Soon afterwards Nikitin wrote in the magazine 'Shakhmaty
v SSSR': 'I would like to talk about 11-year-old Garik Weinstein. Mature
beyond his years, a confirmed bibliophile, he at the same time has retained
the spontaneity of his age. Garik is passing through that golden period, when
for him there are not yet any problems, but there is already a mass of
problems for the people taking care of him. Garik's chess development is being
carefully followed by ex-world champion Botvinnik, who is already deciding his
ration of chess studies and playing commitments. I will not praise the boy -
for the moment he is simply playing chess, I repeat - playing.' --- Thus I was
on 5½ out of 8, and in the event of a win in the concluding round I could
have shared 2nd-4th places and on the tie-break won the silver medal. I was
paired with White against the Leningrad player Alexey Yermolinsky, who was
half a point behind. He was five years older than me and proved to be a
difficult opponent (this was also confirmed two years later in Leningrad).
Nikitin: 'That day I did not urge Garik to win, seeing his anxiety and fatigue,
but simply asked him to play a "good" game...' (see the following game).} *

[Event "8: USSR Junior Championship, Vilnius"]
[Site "?"]
[Date "1975.01.15"]
[Round "9"]
[White "Weinstein, G."]
[Black "Yermolinsky, A."]
[Result "0-1"]
[ECO "B05"]
[Annotator "Garry Kasparov"]
[PlyCount "96"]
[EventDate "1973.??.??"]
[Source "Everyman Chess"]
[SourceDate "2012.11.28"]

1. e4 Nf6 2. e5 Nd5 3. d4 d6 {The expected opening - Yermolinsky's favourite
defence.} 4. Nf3 Bg4 (4... g6 {- Game No.27.}) 5. Be2 e6 6. O-O Be7 7. h3 Bh5
8. c4 Nb6 9. exd6 ({It is evidently better to play} 9. Nc3 O-O 10. Be3 d5 11.
-- ({, and now not} 11. c5 Bxf3 12. gxf3 ({or} 12. Bxf3 Nc4) 12... Nc8 {(the
earlier main line, which was upheld for Black by Alburt and Bagirov).}) ({,
but the new set-up with} 11. cxd5 $5 exd5 ({or} 11... Nxd5 12. Qb3 {, as I
played against Gitsyn (Riga 1977)}) 12. g4 Bg6 13. h4 {(I enthusiastically
analysed these variations with Korsunsky). But Nikitin and I had prepared
something different.})) 9... cxd6 10. Nbd2 O-O 11. b3 {'Garry chose a piece
set-up which he had spotted a week before the tournament, studying 'Informator
Volume 17' sent by me to Baku.' (Nikitin)} Nc6 12. Bb2 Bf6 ({At that time they
usually played} 12... d5 13. c5 Nd7 14. a3) ({but later Alburt's plan with} 
12... Bg6 13. a3 a5 {and ...Bf6 was deemed more flexible.}) 13. a3 d5 ({Here
too} 13... Bg6 {is acceptable, not hurrying to increase White's spatial
advantage.}) 14. c5 Nc8 $6 {A new move;} ({not as good as} 14... Nd7 {, which
would have led to a position from the 'Informator' game Torre-Schmid (Nice
Olympiad 1974), where after} 15. b4 a6 16. Rc1 $1 b6 $6 17. cxb6 Qxb6 18. Qa4
Rfc8 19. Rc3 $1 {White seized the initiative.}) 15. b4 a6 16. Rc1 {The cunning
'Torre manoeuvre'.} ({If} 16. Nb3 {there is the good reply} Bxf3 17. Bxf3 N8e7
{, but now in the event of 16...Bxf3 White retains a plus by 17 Nxf3!.}) 16...
N8e7 $4 {An unexpected blunder of a piece.} 17. Nb3 $4 {'After this for almost
the whole of 1975 I called Garik not by his name, but only "g4"! Even a
mistake can become a part of useful experience, if you remember about it.' 
(Nikitin)} ({Hardly had he made the move when Yermolinsky saw the winning} 17.
g4 $1 Bg6 18. g5 {and his face promptly changed. But I did not notice anything,
since I replied without thinking.}) 17... Bxf3 18. Bxf3 Nf5 {A secondary
drawback to 17 Nb3 is that the move Rc1 has been depreciated; with the rook on
a1 it would have been possible to play Bc3, a3-a4 and Qd3, preparing b4-b5,
but now White is forced to change plan.} 19. Bg4 $1 g6 20. Qd3 Bg7 21. Bc3 Qf6
{By intensifying the pressure on the d4-pawn, Black provokes the exchange of
the enemy bishop for the knight on f5.} 22. Bxf5 (22. Rfd1 $5 {with the idea of
} Nh6 23. Be2 {was more forceful, but I wanted to deny the opponent any
counterplay.}) 22... Qxf5 23. Qxf5 exf5 (23... gxf5 {was no better.}) 24. a4 {
A standard flank offensive, which, however, does not promise any great
benefits.} Nd8 {Firecting the knight in good time to e6.} 25. b5 Ne6 26. Ra1 {
The rook has to be returned to the 'correct place'.} Rfc8 27. Rfd1 (27. Rfc1 $5
{was more interesting, intending the c5-c6 breakthrough (and if ...b7xc6, then
b5-b6).}) 27... b6 $2 {A serious mistake, which could have led to defeat.} ({
The simplest was} 27... Nc7 {, forcing} 28. b6 Ne6 {with equality (} 29. Na5 $6
{is weak in view of} Nxc5 $1 {). However, the unexpected undermining move
unsettled me: is it really possible to play this?! --- 'The quiet course of
the game has suddenly changed abruptly, and the situation has become sharp and
uncertain. For a player who has just been rejoicing in his position, such a
change is especially unpleasant.' (Nikitin)}) 28. Rdc1 $2 {Again an error in
reply!} ({I saw immediately that after} 28. c6 $2 axb5 29. axb5 Nc7 {the
b5-pawn would be lost.}) ({But I completely overlooked} 28. cxb6 $1 Rxc3 29.
Rac1 $1 ({not} 29. b7 $6 Rb8 30. bxa6 Rxb3) {, when things are bad for Black:}
29... Rxc1 ({or} 29... Rc4 30. b7 Rb8 31. bxa6 Nc7 32. Na5 Nxa6 33. Nxc4 dxc4
34. Rxc4 Rxb7 35. Rc8+ Bf8 36. d5 {etc}) 30. Rxc1 Nd8 31. Re1 $1 axb5 (31...
Nb7 32. Re7) 32. Re8+ Bf8 33. a5 {.}) 28... bxc5 29. b6 cxd4 (29... c4 $5 {was
also good:} 30. b7 cxb3 31. Bb2 Rcb8 32. bxa8=Q Rxa8 {with full compensation
for the exchange.}) 30. Bb2 (30. Bd2 $5 {was more accurate, with equality.})
30... Rab8 ({More complicated play would have resulted from} 30... Re8 $5 31.
Rab1) ({or the clever} 30... Rc3 $5 31. Na5 Rb8 32. Bxc3 dxc3 33. Rab1 {.}) 31.
a5 $6 ({After} 31. Rxc8+ Rxc8 32. Rc1 Rxc1+ 33. Bxc1 Be5 34. b7 {with such a
strong passed pawn White is not in danger of losing, despite his material
deficit.}) 31... Rc4 $1 32. Nd2 Rxc1+ ({I would have been set far more
problems by the flamboyant} 32... Rc3 $1 {.}) 33. Rxc1 Kf8 34. Nb3 Be5 (34...
Ke7 {was a little better, although here too the position is one of dynamic
balance.}) 35. Ba3+ Ke8 $2 {A typical time-trouble 'lapse'.} (35... Kg7 36. Kf1
{with equality was correct, whereas now Black is again on the verge of defeat!}
) 36. Re1 $1 f6 37. f4 $1 {A spectacular blow!} Nxf4 38. Bd6 $1 Rd8 39. Bc7 $1
{Nikitin: 'The tactical resources in the position stirred the boy's thinking,
and he made several strong moves in succession. In terrible time-trouble and
in a difficult position Black decides on a trick.'} d3 $2 {Strangely enough,
this losing move - wins!} ({'Normal' continuations were insufficient:} 39...
Ne6 40. Bxd8 Kxd8 41. Rc1 Nf4 42. Rc5) ({or} 39... Nd3 40. Re2 Kd7 (40... Nb4
41. b7 $1) 41. Bxd8 Kxd8 42. Rd2 Nb4 43. Nxd4 {.}) 40. Kf2 $4 {Suicidal!} ({As,
however, was the naïve} 40. b7 $4 Ne2+ 41. Kf1 Bxc7 {.}) ({I again cracked
under the psychological pressure...} 40. Rxe5+ $1 fxe5 41. b7 $1 {would have
been immediately decisive.}) ({But the most annoying thing was that} 40. Kf1 {
would also have retained real winning chances -} Ne2 41. Bxd8 Kxd8 42. Rd1 Ng3+
43. Kf2 Ne4+ 44. Kf3 {and Rxd3.}) 40... d2 $1 41. Rxe5+ ({Alas,} 41. Nxd2 {was
bad because of} Nd3+ {and ...Nxe1.}) 41... fxe5 42. Nxd2 Nd3+ (42... Ne6 $5 {.}
) 43. Ke3 Nc5 $1 44. Bxe5 Kd7 45. Nf3 Re8 46. Kd4 Nb3+ 47. Kxd5 Nxa5 48. Bf4
Kc8 {. Nikitin: 'Garik manfully endured the blow of fate and, after signing
the scoresheet, walked away in silence from the board. But his composure did
not last long - only as far as the exit from the tournament hall. Here he went
up to his mother, nestled up to her and quietly sobbed... After becoming a
grandmaster, Garry was to gain fame as the best finisher - a player capable of
winning any decisive game. But the first attempt proved a failure.' ---
Results of the 1975 USSR Junior Championship: 1. Vladimirov - 7½ out of 9; 2.
Kengis and 3. V.Sokolov - 6½; 4-6. Yurtaev, Yermolinsky and Gabdrakhmanov -
6; 7-11. Weinstein, Dvoyris, Pekker, Magerramov and Dolmatov - 5½ etc.} (
48... -- {Taking into account my age, and the fact that I finished 7th on the
tie-break, this was not a bad result for a debutant. On 24th February Leonard
Barden, chess columnist for the Guardian newspaper, made the following
forecast: 'Whatever happens to the world title in 1975, most experts predict
that Karpov will be Fischer's successor - this year, in 1978, or in 1981. But
who will be world champion after Karpov? In my opinion there is a very clear
favourite for world champion in 1990. He is 11-year-old Garry Weinstein from
Baku, youngest player in the USSR junior championship and youngest candidate
master since Karpov.' Barden was wrong by five years, but the very fact that
he made such a forecast is worthy of note... --- After the battles in Vilnius
I returned to my school studies, where I was at the end of my 5th year, and to
regular chess lessons. Twice, in February and May, I went to Dubna for
sessions of the Botvinnik School. --- Nikitin: 'One spring day in 1975 into
the Kasparovs' flat walked Vladimir Andreevich Makogonov - one of the
strongest Soviet masters of the pre-war period, a player with a subtle,
"Rubinstein" style and a grandmaster understanding of the game. He was already
turned 70, and his meetings with Garik were infrequent, but they continued for
more than two years, to the end of 1977. They took the form of conversations,
and I asked the boy to follow carefully the logic of the Master's thinking and
his approach to the evaluation of individual moves and positions. These
conversations were of invaluable benefit to Garik, they helped him to
systemise his positional knowledge, and in time the
Tartakower-Makogonov-Bondarevsky Variation in the Queen's Gambit and the solid
set-up with 4...Bf5 in the Caro-Kann became reliable weapons for him.' In Baku
everyone learned the Caro-Kann from Makogonov's games! He was indeed a great
master, and I am grateful to fate that I was fortunate enough to have contact
with him.}) 0-1

[Event "9: Spartak Junior Ch., Peterhof"]
[Site "?"]
[Date "1975.07.27"]
[Round "7"]
[White "Weinstein, G."]
[Black "Kantsler, B."]
[Result "1-0"]
[ECO "A08"]
[Annotator "Garry Kasparov"]
[PlyCount "63"]
[EventDate "1973.??.??"]
[Source "Everyman Chess"]
[SourceDate "2012.11.28"]

{Early in July 1975 in Tbilisi the Baku Pioneers Palace team easily won the
qualifying event for the final of the next 'tournament of young hopes', and on
top board I scored 3½ out of 4. And in the second half of July I made my
debut in the junior championship of the all-union Spartak sports society. ---
This was an important moment: while retaining the right to play for the
Pioneers Palace, I finally became a Spartak member, like my trainer in the
republic's junior team, Alexander Shakarov (true, our individual lessons began
only a year later). My mother and I lived quite modestly, and it proved most
opportune when Botvinnik and his friend, the prominent chess official Yakov
Rokhlin, were able to 'procure' Spartak food coupons for me, as well as a
monthly stipend of 120 roubles. Nikitin: 'Such support by the Teacher became
increasingly necessary with each new chess success by Garry, and each time it
was timely and effective.' --- That junior tournament took place in Peterhof,
the famous suburb of Leningrad. The fourteen contestants were divided into two
all-play-all semi-finals, and the four winners of each went through into the
final. Here the results of the semi-final games between them were carried
forward, and after the four final rounds the overall scores were determined.
Nikitin, who regarded this event as a preparation stage for future serious
tournaments, asked me to try and avoid any set-backs and to finish in the
first six. --- Endeavouring to fulfil my trainer's objective, I became
over-anxious and began with a loss, but I was able to take myself in hand and
score three successive wins. But in the 5th round I lost with White to the
16-year-old Kharkov player Mikhail Gurevich, in the future a grandmaster and
one of my seconds. And although I then defeated his contemporary, Leonid
Yudasin from Leningrad - also a future grandmaster, my starting position in
the final eight was very modest - only 1 out of 3. Now everything would be
decided by the games with the four players from the other semi-final. --- My
first opponent in the final, Boris Kantsler from Kirgizia, was just a year
older than me and was reputed to be a promising young player. A few years
later he was the winner (1979) and a prize-winner (1980) in the USSR Junior
Championship, but later his chess development slowed sharply, his family
emigrated to Israel - and at the very end of the century Boris nevertheless
became a grandmaster!} 1. e4 ({After looking at Fischer's victorious games,
for this tournament I prepared the King's Indian Attack and I successfully
employed it in the 3rd round, but in the 5th Mikhail Gurevich obtained a
comfortable game after} 1. Nf3 d5 2. g3 c5 3. Bg2 e6 4. O-O Bd6 5. d3 Ne7 6. e4
Nbc6 7. Re1 Qc7 $6 (7... O-O) 8. Nbd2 $6 (8. exd5 $1) 8... O-O 9. b3 f6 10. Bb2
d4 11. a4 e5 {.}) ({I also did not achieve anything in a simultaneous game
with Polugayevsky:} 1. e4 c5 2. Nf3 e6 3. d3 d5 4. Nbd2 Nc6 5. g3 Bd6 6. Bg2
Nge7 7. O-O O-O 8. Re1 Bc7 9. Qe2 b6 {, etc.}) 1... e6 2. d3 {'I called this
way of playing the opening with White "a set-up for a lazy-bones". Soon it
found its way on to the list I compiled of set-ups which were temporarily
forbidden, and against the French Garik had to switch to the more active 2 d4.
' (Nikitin)} d5 3. Nd2 c5 4. g3 Nc6 5. Bg2 g6 {With this set-up Kantsler
surprised me;} ({I did not know its subtleties and was expecting only the
popular} 5... Nf6 6. Ngf3 Be7 {(an example: Fischer-Miagmarsuren, Sousse
Interzonal 1967).}) 6. Ngf3 Bg7 7. O-O Nge7 8. Re1 O-O 9. Qe2 $6 ({The
immediate} 9. e5 {is more popular, and only if} Qc7 {-} 10. Qe2 {with
double-edged play after} b5 {(b6),} (10... a5) ({or} 10... g5 $5 {.})) 9... b5
10. e5 a5 {As a result, Black has gained a tempo for his thematic offensive on
the queenside.} 11. Nf1 Ba6 12. h4 b4 13. N1h2 {(2)} h6 $1 {The key idea of
the defence - otherwise Bg5 and Ng4. Here I felt rather dismayed, since I did
not see how to breach the opponent's fortress.} 14. Bf4 Kh7 15. Bh3 $6 {(3) A
dubious undertaking: control over the f5-square is of no use.} (15. Ng4 Nf5 16.
Qd2 {with the idea of h4-h5 was correct, in order after ...g6-g5 (although in
fact this is not obligatory) to sacrifice the knight on g5.}) 15... c4 16. Kg2
{(3)} Nf5 17. Bxf5 $6 {(2) Risky, but at the least consistent - everywhere
Black has a comfortable game.} gxf5 (17... exf5 $5 {.}) 18. g4 $1 {White has
to continue in the same vein. 'Garik remembered his game with Yermolinsky and
the jocular nickname "g4". But the deliberate making of such moves is an
indicator of the boy's precociously mature thinking.' (Nikitin)} fxg4 $2 {
Releasing the 'animal' from the cage - strangely enough, this is already the
decisive mistake.} ({Black had several good replies, in particular} 18... cxd3
19. cxd3 d4) ({or first} 18... Ne7 {with the intention of ...cxd3, ...d5-d4
and play on the long light-square diagonal.}) 19. Nxg4 {Building up the
pressure.} Ne7 (19... cxd3 $1 {was far more resilient:} 20. cxd3 (20. Qd2 $6 h5
$1) 20... Ne7 {, and in the event of} 21. Bg5 $3 hxg5 22. hxg5 Ng6 $1 ({not} 
22... Rh8 23. Nf6+ $1 {(as in the game)}) 23. -- ({, with the pretty idea} 23.
Nf6+ Bxf6 24. Rh1+ Kg8 25. gxf6 Nf4+ 26. Kf1 Bxd3 $1 {, forcing} 27. Rg1+ {
with perpetual check.}) ({. But here too after the computer variation} 23. Qd2
$1 Bh8 $1 24. Rh1+ $1 ({if} 24. Nf6+ Kg7 {, then ...Rg8 and ...Kf8}) 24... Kg7
25. Rh6 $1 Bxd3 $1 26. Rah1 Rg8 27. Nh4 $1 Rc8 28. Nxg6 Be4+ $1 29. f3 Bxg6 30.
Qf4 Bf5 ({or} 30... Rc4 31. Qf6+ Qxf6 32. exf6+ Kf8 33. Rxh8 {Black's problems
are too great}) 31. Ne3 Bg6 32. b3 $1 {. --- It only remained to play 20...Nf5,
and White's attack would die out after hardly managing to begin...})) 20. Bg5
$3 {(18) A sudden, purely intuitive bishop sacrifice. Of course, I did not
see all its consequences, but I sensed that White should be alright: his
pieces are so well placed! At that time I did not yet realise that most of my
opponents had a different attitude to material. And Kantsler probably believed
that with his extra piece Black would somehow be able to defend himself.} hxg5
{A difficult choice.} ({White also has a terribly strong attack after} 20...
Rg8 21. Kh3 $1 {followed by Bf6 and Rg1}) ({or} 20... cxd3 {(alas, too late)}
21. Qd2 $1 hxg5 (21... Rh8 22. Bf6 $1) ({or} 21... dxc2 22. Qxc2+ Kg8 23. Bf6
$1 {is also insufficient}) 22. hxg5 Rh8 (22... Nf5 23. cxd3) 23. Nf6+ $1 Kg6
24. Rh1 {, and Black has no defence.}) 21. hxg5 Rh8 {This loses by force;} ({
as does} 21... Ng6 22. Nf6+ $1 Bxf6 23. Rh1+ $1 Kg8 24. gxf6 Nf4+ 25. Kf1 cxd3
({or} 25... Nxe2 26. Kxe2 cxd3+) 26. Qd2 {(e3) with unavoidable mate.}) (21...
cxd3 22. Qd2 $1 {(cf. the previous note)}) ({or} 21... Bh8 22. Rh1+ ({or} 22.
Qf1 $5 Nf5 23. Qh1+ Kg6 24. Qh3 Rg8 (24... Bg7 25. Nf6) 25. Rh1 Kg7 26. Nf6 {
and wins}) 22... Kg7 23. Nd4 Ng6 (23... Rg8 24. Qf3) 24. Qe3 $1) 22. Nf6+ $1
Kg6 ({It turns out that} 22... Bxf6 {is not possible because of} 23. Rh1+ $1
Kg8 24. gxf6 Ng6 25. Rxh8+ Kxh8 26. Rh1+ Kg8 27. Qe3 Qf8 ({or} 27... Kf8 28.
Nh4 $1 {with crushing threats}) 28. Ng5 {.}) 23. Rh1 $1 Nf5 ({Nothing would
have been changed by} 23... cxd3 24. cxd3 Nf5 25. Rxh8 Bxh8 26. Rh1 {.}) 24.
Rxh8 Bxh8 25. Nd4 $5 (25. Rh1 $1 {was simpler.}) ({However, I picked up the
knight on f3, in order to play} 25. Nh4+ {(?), but at the last moment I saw
that Black would capture the knight with check! I was forced to sacrifice it
on d4...}) 25... Nxd4 ({If} 25... Bxf6 26. gxf6 Nh6 {White decides matters with
} 27. Rg1 ({or} 27. Rh1 Qg8 28. Rg1 {.})) 26. Qh5+ Kf5 {The black king goes
for its last walk.} 27. g6+ {(2) This is not only the shortest, but also the
most spectacular way to the goal.} Kf4 28. Re1 $1 Bxf6 29. f3 $1 {Threatening
Qg4 mate. A pretty combination with the sacrifice of three pieces and lethal
quiet moves! This conducting of the enemy king into my own camp was
undoubtedly a prototype for my game with Topalov (Wijk aan Zee 1999).} Nxf3 30.
Qxf3+ {(4)} Kg5 31. Qg3+ ({Alas, I did not see the mating} 31. Rh1 $1 {.})
31... Kh5 $2 {Nevertheless blundering into a mate.} ({However,} 31... Kh6 32.
exf6 Qxf6 33. Rh1+ Kg7 34. Rh7+ Kg8 35. Rxf7 Qxf7 36. gxf7+ Kxf7 37. Qc7+ Kf6
38. Qc6 $1 Ra7 39. Qb6 Ra8 40. Kf2 cxd3 41. cxd3 {etc. would also have been
hopeless.}) 32. exf6 ({And in view of} 32. exf6 Qxf6 33. Rh1+ {Black resigned 
(1-0). Times: 0.50-0.42.}) (32. -- {After this I scored a further 2 out of 3,
beating the Leningrad player Yuneev and at the finish drawing with Black
against the leader - Desyatkov from Kurgan, a strong candidate master, who,
however, did not break through to the USSR Junior Championships (in Russia the
qualifying tournaments were incredibly tough). The results of the Spartak
championship: 1. Desyatkov - 5½ out of 7; 2-4. Weinstein, Yuneev and M.Gurevich - 4 etc. On the tie-break I was placed second, and everyone
considered this a great success. --- This tournament was the last in which I
played under the surname Weinstein. In August 1975, at a family council of the
Weinsteins and Kasparovs, it was decided that I should take the surname of my
mother, which she had not changed when she married. It seemed natural to
become a Kasparov: for nearly five years I had been brought up in my mother's
family, and had grown up under the care of my grandfather Shagen, who had no
sons. But the real implication of what happened was revealed to me much later.
--- Nikitin: 'Changing surname is a delicate process. While normal with women,
it very rarely occurs with men and only, as a rule, when it is obligatory. The
main burden in the fight to carry out the juridical formalities and, more
important, to convince all the relatives and friends of the correctness of the
decision, fell on Garik's mother. How many unpleasant hours Klara had to
endure, how many tears were shed... A year before that, with Botvinnik's
agreement, I began insistently trying to convince her of the need to change
her son's surname. I had no doubts about the boy's brilliant chess future.
From my work in the USSR Sports Committee I knew what inexplicable problems,
not at all to do with chess, could suddenly be encountered by a youth with an
"incorrect" surname, and how his sports career could be imperceptibly hindered
or even altogether ruined. My fears were justified: much has now been written
about the latent anti-Semitism, especially in the upper echelons of Soviet
power. (I should remind you: in those times diplomatic relations with Israel
were broken off and there was a mass emigration of Jews from the USSR - G.K.)
I am convinced that Garry Weinstein would not have got through to a world
championship match with Anatoly Karpov either in 1984, or in 1987. They would
not have allowed it. He would have been eliminated at the distant approaches.
At that time the system worked meticulously.'}) 1-0

[Event "10: 'City Cup' Final, Baku"]
[Site "?"]
[Date "1975.10.??"]
[Round "1"]
[White "Pavlenko, O."]
[Black "Weinstein, G."]
[Result "0-1"]
[ECO "E71"]
[Annotator "Garry Kasparov"]
[PlyCount "68"]
[EventDate "1973.??.??"]
[Source "Everyman Chess"]
[SourceDate "2012.11.28"]

{When in 1989, as three-times world champion and winner of the World Cup, I
overtook Fischer's old rating record and reached the 2800 mark for the first
time in history, Tal made one of his unforgettable jokes: 'Garry is playing so
well, that now he can calmly perform under his previous surname!' --- I
carefully carried the memory of my father through all the turbulent years, and
I am absolutely sure that the Garry Kasparov, who became leader of the chess
world, professed the same values as Garik Weinstein, who once, following the
example of his father, became fascinated by chess... --- In October 1975,
appearing for the first time under the surname Kasparov, I also achieved my
first success among adults: in Baku I won the 'City Cup', a knock-out
tournament with a shortened time control - an hour each for the entire game.
At that time, on the initiative of David Bronstein, rapid chess had become
fashionable (but it soon died away; its time had not yet come). --- There were
128 contestants: the strongest first category players, candidate masters, and
one master - the highly-experienced Oleg Pavlenko, the No.2 in the republic
team. His entry for the tournament was a surprise, and many thought the
question of 1st place was already decided. The players met in mini-matches of
two games: in the event of 1-1, two additional five-minute games were played.
But I did not need these: all my matches, and there were seven (the tournament
lasted exactly a week), I won by 1½-½ or 2-0. --- The culmination of the
race was the final match with Pavlenko. My 33-year-old opponent was a
heavily-built man, and compared with me he was a genuinely 'big chess player' 
(only Bagirov was taller than him). In addition, during the game he smoked
incessantly - one cigarette after another. And in the 1st game I had to employ
a 'prepared variation': as soon as my opponent sat down at the board and,
after making a couple of moves, lit up, I immediately took from my pocket some
chewing-gum, removed its wrapper, shoved it in my mouth and began vigorously
chewing! I think that this made an impression on the master: he had not
expected such impudence from a youngster. At any event, this entire game,
which proved to be decisive, Pavlenko conducted at blitz speed.} 1. d4 Nf6 2.
c4 g6 3. Nc3 Bg7 4. e4 d6 {This was the first year of my employing the King's
Indian (beginning with Game No.4).} 5. h3 {A rare variation, but a popular one
in Baku: this is what Makogonov himself played!} ({Before this at a session of
the Botvinnik School (Dubna 1975) Yusupov chose against me} 5. Nf3 O-O 6. Be2
e5 7. d5 {and after} Nbd7 8. O-O Nc5 9. Qc2 a5 10. Bg5 h6 11. Be3 Nh5 12. g3
Bh3 13. Rfe1 Nd7 $6 14. Nd2 f5 $2 15. exf5 Bxf5 16. Nde4 $2 (16. Qd1 $1) 16...
Ndf6 17. f3 Qd7 18. c5 g5 $2 (18... Nxe4 19. Nxe4 Nf6 {is equal}) 19. Bd3 (19.
Qb3 $1) 19... Nxe4 20. Nxe4 g4 $6 (20... Nf6 $1) 21. fxg4 Bxg4 22. Rac1 {he
gained an obvious advantage. But here I recklessly sacrificed my knight -} Nf4
$2 23. gxf4 exf4 24. c6 $1 bxc6 25. dxc6 Qc8 {, and my opponent faltered:} 26.
Nxd6 $2 (26. Bd2 $1 Bf3 27. Bc4+ $1 Kh8 28. Nf2 {was correct, when White wins})
26... cxd6 27. Qc4+ (27. Bb6 $5 Bf3 $1) 27... Be6 28. Qe4 Bf5 (28... Rf7 $1 {
with equality}) 29. Qd5+ (29. Bc4+ $5 Kh8 30. Qxf4 {was slightly better}) 29...
Be6 30. Qe4 {- draw! Botvinnik was unhappy with my play: it reminded him of
his ill-starred game with Tal (6th match game, Moscow 1960), where out of
nothing with ...Nh5-f4 Black also placed his knight en prise to the g3-pawn 
(Game No.128 in Volume II of 'My Great Predecessors'). My teacher strictly
told me that I needed to study the heritage of the 'King's Indian classics' -
Boleslavsky, Bronstein, Geller, Gligoric, Petrosian, Fischer, Stein... And
when I arrived home, from all possible sources I began copying model games
into a special notebook, and later I looked at them. I also kept up with
official theory. I tested variations in practice, and I gradually accumulated
King's Indian experience.}) 5... O-O 6. Be3 e5 7. d5 Nh5 $6 {I did not yet
know the finer points of this variation; I simply wanted to avoid the typical
bind with g2-g4 and to carry out ...f7-f5 at any price.} 8. Be2 ({After} 8. g3
{Gerusel-Bukic, West Germany v. Yugoslavia 1973, went} a5 9. Be2 Na6 $5 10.
Bxh5 gxh5 11. Qxh5 f5 {with compensation for the pawn.}) 8... f5 $6 {Now this
sacrifice is incorrect.} ({After} 8... Nf4 9. Bf3 f5 10. g3 fxe4 11. Nxe4 {
White has only a minimal advantage.}) 9. Bxh5 $6 {Pavlenko played this without
thinking;} ({although more was promised by} 9. exf5 $1 Nf4 10. Bxf4 exf4 11.
fxg6 {, then Nf3 and 0-0.}) 9... gxh5 10. Qxh5 f4 (10... Na6 11. Bg5 {.}) 11.
Bd2 Nd7 12. O-O-O Nf6 (12... a6 $1 {and ...b7-b5.}) 13. Qe2 Qe8 {Again a
non-essential move;} (13... c6 $5) ({or} 13... a6 $5 {was more interesting.})
14. Nf3 c5 $6 {Reducing the opportunities for counterplay;} ({the immediate} 
14... a6 {was better.}) 15. Kb1 $6 {Typical rapid chess: this merely deprives
the knight of the b1-square and presents Black with an important tempo.} (15.
Rhg1 a6 16. g3 $1 {would have given an appreciable advantage.}) 15... a6 $1 {
At last!} 16. g4 $6 Bd7 $6 ({An exchange of mistakes:} 16... fxg3 $1 {and ...
b7-b5 was correct, when Black succeeds in creating counter-chances.}) 17. Nh4
b5 18. Nf5 $2 {An unexpected blunder of a piece.} ({Instead of the promising} 
18. Rdg1 $1 {and Nf5.}) 18... b4 {At the sight of this move Pavlenko flinched.}
19. Nxd6 Qe7 20. Nf5 Bxf5 21. exf5 $6 {White is rattled;} (21. gxf5 $1 bxc3 22.
Bxc3 {was stronger.}) 21... bxc3 22. Bxc3 Nd7 $6 (22... Ne8 $1 {was more
accurate. Now White has good compensation for the piece.}) 23. d6 {White could
have managed without this move.} Qf7 24. f3 (24. Rhe1 $5 {.}) 24... Rab8 25.
Rd5 $2 {Another slip - and this time the decisive mistake.} (25. b3 {would
have maintained the balance.}) 25... Nb6 26. Rhd1 ({Desperation:} 26. Rd3 Nxc4)
({or} 26. Rdd1 Na4 $1 {.}) 26... Nxd5 ({The immediate} 26... e4 $5 {would also
have won:} 27. Bxg7 Qxg7 28. f6 Rxf6 $1 29. Qxe4 Nxd5 30. Qxd5+ Kh8 {.}) 27.
Rxd5 e4 $1 28. f6 ({Or} 28. Bxg7 exf3 29. Qxf3 Qxg7 30. b3 Rbe8 {.}) 28... Bxf6
29. Rf5 Bxc3 30. Rxf7 Rxb2+ 31. Qxb2 Bxb2 32. Re7 ({After} 32. Rxf8+ Kxf8 33.
Kxb2 exf3 {the black pawn queens.}) 32... exf3 33. Re1 f2 34. Rf1 Bd4 {. In
the 2nd game there was quite a lively battle; I tried to play as solidly as
possible, but in a completely drawn endgame I suddenly blundered a piece!
However, in his haste Pavlenko missed a win - it was obviously not his day. I
remember not only my opponent's grief, but also the reaction of the crowd of
fans: they were as though benumbed - no one could believe in the sensational
defeat of the local maestro. --- A few days later the Moscow weekly '64'
published an article about the Baku Cup by the well-known chess arbiter
Vladimir Dvorkovich: '...The tournament created great interest among Baku
chess fans. Seven candidate masters and the master Oleg Pavlenko reached the
quarter-finals, and in the final the higher-titled player met 12-year-old
Garry Kasparov (earlier we knew him as Weinstein, but he now uses his mother's
surname). A sharp battle ended in victory for the 6th class pupil by 1½-½.
Within two weeks the young holder of the Baku Cup will be leading the Pioneers
Palace team of the Azerbaijan capital in the all-union tournament for the
prize of the Komsomolskaya pravda newspaper.'} 0-1

[Event "?"]
[Site "?"]
[Date "????.??.??"]
[Round "?"]
[White "Meetings with the Greats"]
[Black "?"]
[Result "*"]
[Annotator "Garry Kasparov"]
[PlyCount "1"]
[EventDate "1984.??.??"]
[SourceDate "2012.12.06"]

{My first chess idol was Boris Spassky. It was in 1969, when I was beginning
to play chess, that he became world champion, and my dad was one of his fans.
The match collection 'Petrosian-Spassky 1969' with excellent commentaries by
the players' seconds, Boleslavsky and Bondarevsky, was my first chess book.
Apparently, this was a sign of fate: its special editor was - Alexander
Nikitin! But when in 1972 Spassky lost the match in Reykjavik, my interest in
him cooled - and I developed a childish admiration for Bobby Fischer (however,
at that time who didn't admire him!). And when I began studying chess
seriously, my idols became Alekhine and Tal, whose play excited the
imagination. My favourite chess reading was a book about Tal and Petrosian by
Viktor Vasiliev, and a simultaneous game with Tal in the spring of 1974 was
one of the most memorable events of my childhood. --- I keenly followed the
sharp rivalry of the young Karpov with the 'old hand' Korchnoi - first in the
Interzonal Tournament (1973), and then in the final Candidates match (1974).
And the 21st game of this match was one that I even saw live: I was passing
through Moscow, returning home from a session of the Botvinnik School, and
Nikitin took me with him to the game. For the first time in my life I became
absorbed in the amazing match atmosphere - that reverential quiet in the hall,
occasionally broken first by murmurs of delight, and then of disappointment;
to the seething of the press centre, where my trainer took me to 'look at the
thinking giants'. Then he took me back to the hall and left me there. Staring
at the enormous demonstration board, I was stupefied: Korchnoi had a winning
sacrifice! While the grandmaster was considering his 13th move, Nikitin
returned. I whispered to him: 'Knight h7!' And he replied only 'Y-yes...'
Obviously others had also noticed this: the spectators became animated.
Korchnoi played this - and won quickly. This first, brief encounter with
top-level chess left an indelible impression on me. Of course, I did not yet
imagine that within a year I would be meeting both stars at the board...} 1. --
{This happened in November 1975 in Leningrad, at the final tournament of the
Pioneers Palaces. The line-up of the Baku team had changed significantly:
Korsunsky and Magerramov were now too old, and of the 'old-timers' in the
seven, only myself and Elena Glaz remained. The line-up of the captains giving
the simuls' was also half renewed: among them now were Smyslov, Karpov and
Korchnoi! --- Although I was already playing much more strongly than in the
previous such tournament, I again began with a loss to an ex-world champion -
the imperturbable Vasily Smyslov. And I was terribly upset, since first I
squandered an advantage, and then in one move (26 Nd4? instead of 26 Ng3!) I
lost an equal position. The next day I gained an enormous advantage with Black
against the Alma-Ata master Boris Katalymov, but I 'did everything' to avoid
winning. By the time that the game was adjourned my opponent appeared to have
some saving chances, but I was nevertheless awarded a win on adjudication. ---
In the 3rd-round match against the Kuybyshev team I had an interesting game
with Lev Polugayevsky. From the opening I did not achieve anything (cf. Game
No.9, note to White's 2nd move), but I was able to initiate tactical
complications. Thinking over his 14th move, the grandmaster sat down at my
board - and 'went to sleep' for 40 minutes! As a result - a rare occurrence in
a simul' - his clock was going on all seven boards! Usually the simultaneous
player does not allow this, but Polugayevsky was trying to solve a difficult
problem: it turned out that the reply he had been intending would have lost a
piece. In the end he found the only way of maintaining the balance and on the
26th move he offered a draw. I agreed, not seeing any real chances of success
in a slightly better endgame. Polugayevsky breathed a sigh of relief - and won
all the remaining games!} *

[Event "11: Pioneers Palaces, Leningrad"]
[Site "?"]
[Date "1975.11.08"]
[Round "4"]
[White "Karpov, A."]
[Black "Kasparov, G."]
[Result "1-0"]
[ECO "B92"]
[Annotator "Garry Kasparov"]
[PlyCount "89"]
[EventDate "1975.??.??"]
[Source "Everyman Chess"]
[SourceDate "2012.11.28"]

{In the 4th round I finally made the acquaintance of Anatoly Karpov, who was
performing the role of captain of the Chelyabinsk team. He was 24 years old,
and not long before he had inherited from Fischer the title of world champion.
Even so, the first meeting with Karpov did not provoke in me the same
trepidation, as in the previous year's game with Tal. But the other lads in
the team were nervous and they went along to the game as though they were
already lost. In the foyer of the hotel, where the tournament was being held,
I said: 'What are you afraid of? Karpov is the world champion, but even he can
make a mistake.' Apparently these words were overheard, and the following day
one of Karpov's backers, the secretary of the local regional party committee,
Tupikin, said to my mother: 'Bear it in mind: Karpov is unforgiving.' --- In
its report on this round Soviet Sport wrote: 'During Anatoly Karpov's simul'
with the juniors from Baku there came a moment when the world champion was
left with only one opponent - 12-year-old candidate master Garik Kasparov.
Karpov sat down opposite the young player and, naturally, the photographers
did not miss this moment. The point is that Garik is one of our most talented
young players, and who knows, perhaps sometime in the future there will be
another Karpov-Kasparov encounter...' --- Who could then have imagined that
years later, over a period of six years, we would have to play some hundred
and fifty games against each other and spend more than 600 hours at the board?!
} 1. e4 c5 2. Nf3 d6 3. d4 cxd4 4. Nxd4 Nf6 5. Nc3 a6 {I think this was the
first time I played the Najdorf Variation.} 6. Be2 ({Before the game Nikitin
showed me the latest subtleties of the Polugayevsky Variation: after} 6. Bg5 e6
7. f4 b5 $5 8. e5 dxe5 9. fxe5 Qc7 10. Qe2 Nfd7 11. O-O-O Bb7 12. Qg4 {one
should play not} Qxe5 ({, but} 12... Qb6 {. I remember that I tried to find
out from my trainer: 'But what about this, and what about that?' And he said
to me: 'Work it out at the board!' However, Karpov chose his favourite 6th
move...})) 6... e5 7. Nb3 Be7 8. Bg5 ({Although this move was occasionally
employed by Fischer and Tal, it offers fewer chances than the usual} 8. O-O {
. But here} Be6 9. f4 {would have led to a well-known position from the recent
Karpov-Polugayevsky Candidates match (1974). And the champion did that which
simultaneous players always do: he tried to deviate and take me away from my
home preparation.}) 8... Be6 {(4)} ({Earlier} 8... Nbd7 9. a4 $1 {was in
fashion (Fischer-Olafsson, Reykjavik 1960; Karpov-Balashov, 38th USSR
Championship, Riga 1970).}) 9. f4 {In the aforementioned match Karpov played
this with his bishop on c1, and in the event of 9...exf4 he would have gained
an important tempo for development. And after 9...Qc7 he used the tempo saved
to squeeze Black on the queenside - 10 a4 (Game Nos.54, 56, 57 in Volume V of
'My Great Predecessors'). Now, however, Black is forced to capture on f4, and
Karpov could have hoped that I would complicate matters unnecessarily, when he
would be able to outplay me, even a tempo down.} ({Firm control over the
d5-point -} 9. O-O O-O 10. Bxf6 Bxf6 11. Qd3 ({after} 11. Nd5 {Petrosian and
Fischer replied} Nd7 $5) 11... Nc6 12. Nd5 {- leads to a roughly equal
position in the spirit of the Chelyabinsk Variation:} Bg5 {and ...Ne7 (a
manoeuvre, known from the game Taimanov-Boleslavsky, 17th USSR Championship,
Moscow 1949),} ({or first} 12... Rc8 {- as Tal played against K.Grigorian 
(39th USSR Championship, Leningrad 1971) and Hübner (Tilburg 1980).})) (9. Bxf6
{is of more current interest:} Bxf6 10. Qd3 Nc6 (10... Be7 11. O-O-O Nd7 {is
also played}) 11. O-O-O $1 ({but not} 11. Nd5 Bg5 12. O-O $6 Ne7 $1 {
Arnason-Kasparov, Dortmund 1980}) 11... Nd4 ({or} 11... Be7 $5 12. Kb1 O-O 13.
Nd5 Bg5 14. h4 $5 Bxh4 15. g3 Bf6 {with sharp play (Kramnik-Anand, Wijk aan
Zee 2004). This line has now acquired a large amount of practice}) 12. Nxd4
exd4 13. Nd5 Bxd5 14. exd5 O-O {.}) 9... exf4 10. Bxf4 {Thus, Karpov has
carried out the first part of his plan.} Nc6 11. O-O O-O 12. Kh1 {In the
variation with 8 0-0 this move would already have been made, and White would
retain chances of seizing the initiative by 12 Qe1. --- Ironically, a position
has been reached from the very line of the Neo-Scheveningen - 1 e4 c5 2 Nf3 e6
3 d4 cxd4 4 Nxd4 Nc6 5 Nc3 d6 6 Be2 Nf6 7 0-0 Be7 8 Be3 0-0 9 f4 e5!? 10 Nb3
exf4 11 Bxf4 Be6 12 Kh1 - which later I was intending to play against Karpov
in our first two matches (1984/85 and 1985), only here Black has played the
additional move ...a7-a6, giving him an interesting possibility apart from 12...d5.} b5 $5 {(2) An active 'Sicilian' thrust (incidentally, it did not occur
any more in practice)} ({although perhaps it would, nevertheless, have been
better to maintain the balance with the typical} 12... d5 13. e5 Ne4 ({or} 
13... Nd7 14. Nxd5 Ndxe5) 14. Bd3 f5 {. In the Neo-Scheveningen, with the pawn
on a7, these positions are problematic even today (cf. 'Revolution in the 70s'
p.151).}) 13. Bf3 $6 {After conceiving the rook manoeuvre via f2-d2, Karpov
clears the necessary space for it.} ({However, for the moment there is nothing
for the bishop to do on f3, and the inactive knight should have been
immediately brought into play -} 13. Nd4 $1 {.} -- ({. The exchange} 13... Nxd4
14. Qxd4 {gives White some advantage in the centre}) ({, while after} 13... Ne5
{both} 14. a4 ({and} 14. Nf5) 14... b4 15. Nd5 Bxd5 16. exd5 Qd7 17. Bf3 {are
possible.})) 13... Ne5 {Now there is a much more point to this move.} 14. Nd4
Bc4 {(9)} 15. Rf2 $6 {The start of a standard manoeuvre, but in the given
instance it proves unsuccessful: the rook will not find any work on d2, and
the coordination of the rooks is disrupted.} (15. Re1 {would have retained
equal chances - it looks more passive, but in variations similar to those in
the game the rook is obviously better placed. Thus, it was not I who
complicated matters unnecessarily, but Karpov...}) 15... b4 $1 {(10)} 16. Nd5
Nxd5 17. exd5 Bf6 18. Rd2 {Despite the weakness of the c6-square, Black feels
very comfortable, and White already has to think about how to equalise.} (18.
Nc6 $5 {came into consideration, and if} Qb6 {the sharp exchange sacrifice} 19.
Bxe5 -- (19... Qxf2 20. Bxd6 Rfe8 21. Bg3 Qc5 22. d6 Bb5 23. Qd5 {.}) ({. It
is safer to play} 19... Bxe5 20. Nxe5 dxe5 21. Rd2 (21. Qe1 f5) 21... Qd6 {,
blocking the passed d-pawn and planning ...f7-f5, ...e5-e4 and so on.
Objectively here too Black's chances are better.})) 18... Qb6 ({I did not even
consider} 18... Nxf3 {: it is too early to exchange such a strong knight!}) 19.
Be3 Qc7 $1 {(2)} ({'The position is a tense one, and at any moment a
combinative explosion may occur. Great complications would have resulted from} 
19... Qb7 20. Nf5 Nxf3 21. Qxf3 Bxb2 22. Rb1 Bc3 23. Bd4 Bxd2 24. Bxg7 f6 25.
Qg4 ({and if} 25. Qg3 {both} Rf7 ({and} 25... Qd7 {are possible - everywhere
White has no more than a draw})) 25... Bg5 {', wrote Viktor Khenkin. It is
easy to see that after} 26. Bxf8 $1 Rxf8 (26... Bxa2 27. Rxb4) (26... Bxd5 27.
Bxd6) 27. Qxc4 {White has an overwhelming advantage:} Qd7 28. Qg4 Kh8 29. Rxb4
{etc. Therefore 25...Rf7! is correct, not fearing the discovered check. ---
But why provoke the dangerous knight leap to f5? With the queen on c7 it
clearly does not work (the d6-pawn is defended) and Black continues to build
up his initiative.}) 20. Be4 ({White's problems would not have been solved by} 
20. b3 Bb5 21. Be2 ({after} 21. Nxb5 axb5 {Black also has pressure on the
a-file}) 21... Bd7 22. a3 Qc3 23. Qg1 bxa3 (23... a5 $5) 24. Rxa3 Rfe8 {- the
powerful knight on e5 and the weaknesses in the enemy position give Black the
advantage (although it is unclear how great it is).}) 20... Rfe8 {(it becomes
uncomfortable for the white bishops on the e-file)} 21. Bg1 ({If} 21. b3 $6 {
, then} Bb5 {is again good,} ({but it is also possible to play} 21... Ng6 22.
Bxg6 (22. Qf3 Nh4) 22... hxg6 23. Qf3 {, when Black has a pleasant choice
between} Bb5 (23... Bxd5 24. Qxd5 Qc3) ({and} 23... Bxb3 24. cxb3 Qc3) 24. Bf2
Bd7 25. Rad1 Rac8 {, in every case with the better chances. Now he is again at
a cross-roads.})) 21... g6 {(4) A logical move, killing White's counterplay
on the kingside. Black prepares ...Bg7 and ...f7-f5, and at the same time 22...
Bg5 23 Rf2 Be3 is threatened.} ({It also looks quite good to play} 21... a5 22.
a3 ({Khenkin's recommendation} 22. Rf2 {is worse in view of} Ng6 $1) 22... Ba6
23. Rf2 Nd7) ({or immediately} 21... Nd7 {with the intention of ...Nb6,
attacking the d5-pawn. --- In either case Black continues to exert appreciable
pressure on the opponent's centre and queenside.}) 22. a3 $6 {White needs to
do something, and Karpov sacrifices the exchange.} (22. b3 Bb5 {is more solid.
Now in the event of the gambit move} 23. a3 $6 ({. There only remains} 23. a4
Bd7) ({, or} 23. Nxb5 axb5 24. Bd4 Nd7 (24... Bg7 $5 {, when White's position
is inferior with the material equal})) 23... Bg5 24. Rf2 (24. axb4 Qc3 $1)
24... Be3 25. axb4 (25. Rf6 Nd7 $1) 25... Bxf2 26. Bxf2 Qc3 $1 27. Qe1 (27. g3
Ng4) 27... Qc8 {the compensation for the exchange is insufficient and Black
has every chance of winning:} 28. Nxb5 (28. c4 Nd3 $1) ({or} 28. Qd2 Ng4 29.
Bf3 Nxf2+ 30. Qxf2 Qc3 {etc}) 28... axb5 29. Rxa8 Qxa8 {.}) 22... a5 $6 {(6)} (
{When you are playing the world champion for the first time it is no great sin
to fear the complications after the strongest continuation} 22... Bg5 $1 23.
Rf2 Be3 $1 ({but not} 23... bxa3 24. b3 Bb5 25. c4 $1) {, which enables the
exchange to be won without any particular compensation for White:} 24. axb4 (
24. Rf6 Qe7 $1) ({or} 24. b3 Bxf2 25. Bxf2 Bb5 26. axb4 Qc3 $1 {(cf. the
variation from the previous note)}) 24... Bxf2 25. Bxf2 f5 26. Bf3 Nxf3 27.
Qxf3 Qb7 28. Nc6 Re4 {. --- Now, however, Black's advantage is greatly reduced,
although the initiative is still on his side.}) 23. axb4 axb4 24. Rxa8 Rxa8 25.
b3 Ba6 26. Nc6 Nxc6 $6 {(18) I was carried away by the idea of invading with
my rook on the e-file, but this exchange is fundamentally incorrect, since it
activates the enemy rook on d2, which hitherto has been trying in vain to find
work for itself.} (26... Bb5 $1 {would have retained the better chances for
Black, for example:} 27. Bd4 ({or} 27. Nd4 Bd7 28. Nc6 Bg7 (28... Ng4 $5))
27... Bg5 28. Rf2 Nxc6 29. dxc6 Bxc6 30. Qf3 Re8 $1 31. Bxc6 Re1+ 32. Rf1 Rxf1+
33. Qxf1 Qxc6 {with an extra pawn.}) 27. dxc6 {Attacking the d6-pawn.} Re8 $2 {
'And this is already a mistake - Black tries for too much.} ({The rook on the
a-file was coordinating excellently with the bishop on f6, and all he needed
was to give it scope by} 27... Bb5 {, after which it would not have been easy
for White to guard the 1st rank and simultaneously maintain his c6-pawn. Even
so, after} 28. Bd4 (28. Qf3 Bc3) {, he would have gained a draw:} 28... Bxd4
29. Rxd4 Bxc6 30. -- (30. Rc4 $2 d5 $1 31. Bxd5 Qe5) (30. Rxb4 Bxe4 31. Rxe4
Qc3 32. Re1 Ra2 33. h3 {.' (Khenkin) --- However, here Black has the thematic
stroke 31...Qxc2!.}) ({. Therefore instead of 30 Rxb4? White must play} 30.
Bxc6 Qxc6 31. Rxb4 {, avoiding major problems and with accurate play attaining
the haven of a draw:} Qc3 ({now} 31... Qxc2 $2 {is refuted by the spectacular}
32. Rb8+ $1 Kg7 33. Qd4+) 32. Ra4 Re8 33. Ra1 {and h2-h3.})) 28. Bd5 $2 {A
blunder in reply, typical of a simultaneous player: the fruit of not very deep
penetration into the position when playing against several opponents.} ({White
was suddenly granted an opportunity to win a pawn and gain an overwhelming
advantage -} 28. Rxd6 {, but he did not do this, apparently because of} Bc3 29.
Rd7 Qf4 {, overlooking an elegant refutation:} 30. Re7 $1 {. Now the situation
is again entirely favourable for Black.}) 28... Bc3 29. Rf2 Re1 $6 {But this
is a mistake typical of a young player: also the fruit of a shallow
penetration into the position. Through inexperience I did not realise that it
was not yet time for such a stroke!} ({First the threats on the f-file should
have been neutralised:} 29... Re7 30. Qf3 Kg7 31. g4 f6 32. g5 f5 33. Qh3 Kf8 {
etc. The position had become extremely sharp, and it was not surprising that
Karpov was spending the lion's share of his time on my board. Alas, my team
colleagues were unable to support me: the score was 5-0 in favour of the
simultaneous player plus a strategically hopeless position for Lyosha
Eppelbaum. Soon Lyosha also resigned, and Karpov and I were left face to face...}) 30. Qf3 ({My 'subtle' calculation -} 30. Rxf7 $2 Rxd1 31. Rxc7+ Kh8 32. Bf3
Rc1 {with the irresistible threat of ...Bd4 said something about my
inventiveness, of course, but it proved to be a simple little problem for the
world champion. To the logical question 'why has Black's vitally important
f7-pawn been left undefended?' the answer was found immediately.}) 30... Bd4 $2
{A further error, which this time does not go unpunished.} ({When I showed
this game to Taimanov (after the tournament my mother and I, together with
Nikitin, visited him at his home) he said: 'Of course,} 30... Re7 $1 {should
have been played. Here Black has nothing to fear - all his pieces are in play.
' And although after} 31. Qf4 Bb5 32. Qh4 Be1 {he would have lost a pawn -} 33.
Rxf7 Rxf7 34. Qxe1 Bxc6 35. Bxf7+ Qxf7 36. Qxb4 {, he would have been in no
danger of losing:} Qd5 ({or} 36... Qf1 37. Qb8+ Qf8 38. Qb6 (38. Qxf8+ Kxf8 {
with a draw}) 38... Qf3 $1 {with the unavoidable exchange of queens and a
drawn ending with opposite-colour bishops}) 37. Qg4 Qe4 {.}) 31. Bxf7+ Kg7 {(4)
} 32. Bc4 $1 {Here is the punishment. In my preliminary calculations I missed
this decisive retreat: mate at f8 is threatened, and the bishop at a6 is
attacked.} Rxg1+ {(9)} ({'Black is rattled. The exchanging operation should
have been carried out in a different order -} 32... Bxf2 33. Qxf2 -- (33...
Rxg1+ 34. Kxg1 Qxc6 35. -- ({, although here too after} 35. Qd4+ Kh6 36. Bxa6
Qxa6 37. Qxb4 Qe2 38. Qc3 {White would remain a pawn up.' (Khenkin).}) ({.
This is too modest a summary!} 35. Qa7+ $1 Bb7 36. Qd4+ {is far stronger and
prettier. Now} Kh6 ({and} 36... Kf8 {to the loss of two pawns:} 37. Qh8+ Ke7
38. Qxh7+ Kd8 39. Qxg6) 37. Qe3+ Kg7 38. Qe7+ Kh6 39. Qf8+ Kg5 40. h4+ {leads
to mate})) (33... Bxc4 34. Qxe1 Bd5 {was more tenacious, trying to draw with
the queens and opposite-colour bishops. This is more like a middlegame, where
White is the first to begin a victorious attack on the king:} 35. Qh4 $1 Qxc6 (
35... Bxc6 36. Bd4+ {and Qf6}) 36. Qe7+ Kg8 37. Bd4 Bf7 38. h3 $1 {etc.})) 33.
Kxg1 Bxf2+ 34. Kxf2 Bxc4 35. bxc4 {The queen endgame with the white pawn on c6
is completely hopeless.} Qa7+ {(2)} 36. Ke2 Qd4 {(3)} 37. Qd5 Qf6 38. Qe4 b3 {
(3)} 39. cxb3 Qb2+ 40. Kf1 {Now the assistance of the king is not needed, and
Karpov wins by hiding it in the corner.} Qc1+ 41. Qe1 Qf4+ 42. Kg1 Qd4+ 43. Kh1
Qb6 44. Qe7+ Kh6 45. Qf8+ {. A fighting game! A comment in the press: 'Garik
Kasparov was very upset at losing to the world champion. "I had such a good
position!" he lamented. The young Baku player was right. He held the
initiative throughout almost the entire game, but he used it uncertainly, and
in the end he made a fatal mistake.' --- I had the following dialogue with a
journalist from the Baku sports newspaper: 'How do you explain your defeat at
the hands of the world champion?' --- 'Perhaps by the fact that I remained one
to one with him. Just imagine, sitting opposite you is the best player on the
planet. And so I overlooked his combination.' --- 'And what lesson did you
learn from this meeting?' --- 'You have to fight to the last, even if you are
in a winning position.'} 1-0

[Event "12: Pioneers Palaces, Leningrad"]
[Site "?"]
[Date "2012.11.12"]
[Round "7"]
[White "Korchnoi, V."]
[Black "Kasparov, G."]
[Result "1/2-1/2"]
[ECO "E80"]
[Annotator "Garry Kasparov"]
[PlyCount "84"]
[EventDate "1975.??.??"]
[Source "Everyman Chess"]
[SourceDate "2012.11.28"]

{In the next round I played a draw with Gennady Kuzmin. And at the finish we
met the home team, from Leningrad, who were in keen competition with Moscow
for 1st place. In addition, their captain Viktor Korchnoi was fighting for the
best result by the captains. From the very start of the simul' he was
obviously very keyed up, nervously smoking one cigarette after another. I was
angered when on the 2nd and 4th boards after 1 e4 e6 2 d4 d5 our lads played 3
exd5!? against him. But I, as usual, chose the King's Indian.} 1. d4 Nf6 2. c4
g6 3. Nc3 Bg7 4. e4 d6 5. f3 Nc6 (5... O-O {(Game Nos.51, 81) is more natural,
but at that time against the Sämisch I liked to save a tempo by delaying
castling.}) 6. Be3 a6 7. Nge2 (7. Qd2 {- Game No.15.}) 7... Rb8 8. Nc1 (8. Qd2
{- Game No.87.}) 8... e5 9. d5 Nd4 {On seeing this move, Korchnoi looked at me
and made a puzzled expression.} 10. Bxd4 $6 {Accepting the gambit at the cost
of the exchange of this important bishop.} ({I very much liked the idea of} 10.
N1e2 c5 11. dxc6 bxc6 $6 (11... Nxc6 {is more tedious}) 12. Nxd4 exd4 13. Bxd4
$6 (13. Qxd4 $1 {is correct, with the idea of} Rxb2 14. O-O-O $1 Nh5 15. e5 $1
{, when Black is in trouble}) 13... Rxb2 14. Nb5 $2 ({in the semi-final of the
Baku Cup (1975) Gazarian played} 14. Rb1 {against me, but after} Rxb1 {and ...0-0 all the same he had an inferior position}) 14... Nxe4 $1 {(Platonov-Shamkov
Platonov-Shamkovich, 39th USSR Championship, Leningrad 1971).}) ({But it is
even better to play} 10. Nb3 $5 Nxb3 ({killing Black's desire for} 10... c5 11.
dxc6 Nxc6) 11. Qxb3 c5 {with the initiative. --- But Korchnoi always used to
capture pawns, if he did not see a direct refutation (thus, in the event of 7...0-0 instead of 7...Rb8, if 10 Bxd4? exd4 11 Qxd4 there would have followed 11.
..Nxe4! and wins). Nevertheless, the grandmaster's choice surprised me: I was
sure that the power of the activated bishop on g7 would more than compensate
Black for his small material deficit.}) 10... exd4 11. Qxd4 O-O {(now
threatening ...Nxe4!)} 12. Qd2 ({(after} 12. Be2 {there would have followed}
Nh5 {, and if} 13. Qf2 {, then} c5 $1 {and ...b7-b5)}) 12... c5 {Depriving the
white knight of the d4-square and intending ...b7-b5 or ...Nh5 and ...f7-f5. I
was very happy with my position: such activity, and for just a pawn!} 13. a4 {
An attempt to set up a bind.} ({After} 13. Bd3 Nd7 14. O-O b5 $1 15. cxb5 axb5
16. Nxb5 c4) ({or} 13. Nb3 Bd7 14. Be2 b5 15. O-O bxc4 16. Bxc4 Rb4 {Black has
no reason for complaint.}) 13... Nh5 {(3)} (13... Nd7 {was more circumspect.})
14. g4 $1 {A bold, typically Korchnoi move, without prejudices!} Qh4+ {(4) I
did not want to retreat my knight immediately...} 15. Kd1 $6 {But this
'playing for a win' is dubious.} (15. Qf2 {was more solid, although after}
Qxf2+ 16. Kxf2 Bd4+ 17. Ke1 Nf6 {(f4) Black has good compensation for the pawn.
}) 15... Nf6 {(8)} (15... Qf6 $1 16. Be2 Nf4 {and ...Bd7, keeping the queens
on the board, would have been far more unpleasant for White.}) 16. Qe1 Qxe1+ ({
Now nothing would have been given by} 16... Qg5 {, for example:} 17. h4 Qf4 18.
Be2 Nd7 19. Nd3 Qe3 20. Qg1 {, nevertheless exchanging the queens.}) 17. Kxe1
Nd7 18. Be2 Ne5 {(10)} 19. Rg1 f5 {(3)} ({A crucial choice: after} 19... g5 {
Black would have had equal chances thanks to his powerful knight on e5 and the
dark-square blockade, but I preferred more complicated and dynamic play.}) 20.
exf5 ({Or} 20. gxf5 gxf5 {and ...Kh8.}) 20... gxf5 21. g5 {Continuing to
believe in the worth of the extra pawn.} Bd7 {(7) A natural developing move;}
({but} 21... Re8 $5 {(not allowing f3-f4)} 22. Kd1 {(d2)} Ng6 {and only then ...Bd7 was more subtle - this would have maintained the favourable tension.}) 22.
Kd2 $6 ({It was sounder to play the alternative} 22. f4 $1 Ng6 ({or} 22... Ng4
23. Bxg4 (23. h3 $2 Bd4) 23... fxg4 24. N1e2) 23. Rf1 Rfe8 24. Kd2 {with
approximate equality.}) 22... b5 $1 {(12) A completely unexpected thrust:
after all, White is attacking b5 with many pieces! From this point Korchnoi
switched almost entirely to the game with me, and the two other draws which he
made in the simul' were to some extent a result of the chronic problems he
faced here.} 23. axb5 ({In the event of} 23. cxb5 axb5 24. a5 (24. f4 bxa4 $5)
24... c4 {Black has an unpleasant initiative:} 25. Kc2 ({or} 25. a6 Rb6 $5 {
and ...Ra8}) 25... b4 26. Na4 b3+ $1 {. Therefore White reconciles himself to
simplification, hoping to defend in an inferior endgame.}) 23... axb5 24. cxb5
Bxb5 $1 {(this was deeply calculated)} 25. Nxb5 Rxb5 26. Bxb5 Nxf3+ 27. Kc2
Nxg1 28. Nd3 ({The attempt to imprison the knight on g1 by} 28. Ra3 {would not
have succeeded after} Rb8 29. Rb3 f4 {.}) 28... Nf3 29. Bd7 Nd4+ {(6)} ({
Nowadays, without thinking, I would have played} 29... Nxg5 $1 {, obtaining a
sound extra pawn:} 30. Rf1 (30. Ra4 Nf3 {etc}) 30... c4 $1 31. Nc1 f4 {.}) 30.
Kd1 f4 31. Be6+ ({Seeking practical chances -} 31. Ra6 f3 32. Ke1 Nc2+ 33. Kd2
f2 34. Be6+ Kh8 35. Bh3 Nd4 {was clearly advantageous to Black.}) 31... Nxe6 {
(7) The correct reply.} ({Nikitin's recommendation} 31... Kh8 {would have
left White with more hopes of saving the game.}) 32. dxe6 f3 33. Ra7 Re8 {(11)}
({Safely avoiding a pitfall:} 33... f2 34. Nxf2 Rxf2 35. e7 Kf7 36. e8=Q+ $1
Kxe8 37. Rxg7 Rxh2 38. b3 {with real prospects of a draw.}) ({But} 33... c4 $5
34. e7 Re8 35. Nf4 Bxb2 36. Nd5 Kf7 {would have retained a serious advantage.})
34. Rf7 c4 {(2)} 35. Nf4 $6 (35. Nf2 Rxe6 36. Rxf3 Bxb2 37. Ng4 {was more
resilient.}) 35... Bxb2 $6 {(4)} ({The sudden exchange of rooks would have
been decisive -} 35... Rf8 $1 {.}) 36. Nd5 Rxe6 37. Rxf3 Kg7 $6 {(4) This
move suggests itself;} ({but} 37... Re4 $1 {was more energetic. In such
situations all the participants in the simuls' - and I was no exception -
dreamt, without spoiling anything, of reaching the time control at move 45,
adjourning the game and having it adjudicated. And there a win would be found
by the grandmasters... But to make a dozen normal moves in a position with
dynamic factors was not at all easy!}) 38. Ne3 c3 $2 ({Alas, the text cuts off
the bishop on b2 and throws away the winning chances which would still have
remained after} 38... Re4 $1 {.}) 39. h4 Re5 (39... Kg6 40. Nd5 {with a draw.})
40. Nf5+ Kg6 {(2)} 41. Ng3 $1 {A very strong manoeuvre, creating adequate
counterplay.} Re6 {(4)} 42. Rd3 h6 {(3) Draw agreed on Black's proposal. ---
Of course, I was terribly annoyed: to be one step away from victory over none
other than Korchnoi - and I stumbled... My opponent was also upset: this game
proved very difficult for him, and three draws against the Baku team deprived
him of 1st place among the simul' givers. --- Their 'tournament' ended as
follows: Smyslov - 38 out of 42; Korchnoi - 37½; Karpov and Polugayevsky -
37 (I should mention that it was rather easier for the first two, since the
remaining captains had to play both of the strongest teams - Moscow and
Leningrad). The overall tournament was also won by the Muscovites, who
together with Smyslov scored 54 out of 84 and finished ahead of Leningrad with
Korchnoi (49½), Kuybyshev with Polugayevsky and Chelyabinsk with Karpov 
(both 42), Baku with Bagirov (39), Voroshilovgrad with Kuzmin (37½) and
Alma-Ata with Katalymov (30). --- My performance, 2½ out of 6, was deemed
comparatively satisfactory. Despite the fact that in the games with
Polugayevsky, Karpov and Korchnoi I scored only one point, the character of
the play showed that any result could have been possible! --- Nikitin: 'The
hand of the little fighter was not yet firm, but in games with him
grandmasters had to endure considerable difficulties. Not without reason,
after the tournament Karpov, Korchnoi and Polugayevsky remarked on Garik's
play. The world champion liked his "serious approach to the game", and
Korchnoi - "his quite sober understanding of complicated positions". It has to
be agreed that praise of this sort addressed to a twelve-year-old boy is an
indication of his outstanding talent. To me it was evident that his first,
timid steps along the road to top-level chess would soon be replaced by a leap.
..'} 1/2-1/2

[Event "?"]
[Site "?"]
[Date "????.??.??"]
[Round "?"]
[White "Young Champion"]
[Black "?"]
[Result "*"]
[Annotator "Garry Kasparov"]
[PlyCount "1"]
[EventDate "1984.??.??"]
[SourceDate "2012.12.06"]

{My second USSR Junior (up to 18) Championship took place in January 1976 on
the stage of the Tbilisi Chess Palace, which from then on became a noteworthy
place for me. I was not expecting to win, since I was again the youngest
player, some three to five years younger than my opponents. But in the depths
of my heart there was nevertheless a glimmer of hope - and, as it transpired,
not without reason. --- I had gained experience and I no longer felt even
slightly intimidated by my elders. I started confidently - 4½ out of 5,
including wins over Lputian and Yudasin. It appeared that the fight for the
title would be between me and another pupil of Botvinnik's school -
16-year-old Rafael Gabdrakhmanov from Kazan, with whom I drew after a sharp
King's Indian in the 3rd round.} 1. -- {In the 6th and 7th rounds I slowed
down - I made draws with Sturua and Vasilenko. But in the 8th, penultimate
round, with Black I won a very complicated and tense Sicilian against Yurtaev,
gaining revenge for my defeat the previous year in Vilnius. Thus before the
finish Gabdrakhmanov and I had 6½ out of 8, the 16-year-old Georgian adult
champion Zurab Sturua was on 6, with Lanka, Vasilenko and a number of other
contestants on 5½. --- In the concluding round, the fight for first place
unexpectedly became much sharper! Sturua had White against Gabdrakhmanov, and
I - against the new hope of Latvian chess, the 15-year-old Zigurds Lanka. We
all knew that, in the event of a share of first place, Gabdrakhmanov would
have the best Buchholz score, Sturua would have a good one, and I would most
probably have the worst. Therefore I needed to win, but I was already very
tired and, as ill luck would have it, I played dreadfully. It was a strange
thing: for the second time in a year I floundered in one of the fashionable
lines of the Maroczy.} *

[Event "13: USSR Junior Championship, Tbilisi"]
[Site "?"]
[Date "1976.01.17"]
[Round "9"]
[White "Kasparov, G."]
[Black "Lanka, Z."]
[Result "1/2-1/2"]
[ECO "B39"]
[Annotator "Garry Kasparov"]
[PlyCount "119"]
[EventDate "1976.??.??"]
[Source "Everyman Chess"]
[SourceDate "2012.11.28"]

1. e4 c5 2. Nf3 Nc6 3. d4 cxd4 4. Nxd4 g6 5. c4 Bg7 6. Be3 Nf6 7. Nc3 Ng4 8.
Qxg4 Nxd4 9. Qd1 Ne6 10. Qd2 Qa5 11. Rc1 b6 12. Be2 Bb7 13. f3 f5 14. exf5 gxf5
15. O-O Rg8 16. Rfd1 d6 17. a3 $6 {(7)} (17. Nd5 $1 Qxd2 18. Rxd2 {is far
better (and above all - safer!), and if} Rc8 {, then} 19. Re1 $1 {(Jansa-Reeh,
Gausdal 1990).}) 17... f4 $1 18. Bxf4 {A repetition of my game with Yurtaev 
(Vilnius 1975).} Qf5 $5 {A novelty, specially prepared by Lanka (previously he
had not employed this variation).} (18... Qh5 $1 19. Nd5 (19. Be3 $2 Be5) 19...
Nxf4 20. Nxf4 Qc5+ {and ...Bh6 is even better, with excellent play for the
pawn.}) ({Yurtaev preferred} 18... Bd4+ $6 19. Kh1 Qf5 {and after} 20. Nd5 $6
Bxd5 21. cxd5 Nxf4 22. Bb5+ $6 (22. g4 {is equal}) 22... Kf7 23. Qxd4 $6 (23.
g4 Rxg4 24. Qc2 {is more resilient}) 23... Rxg2 24. Bd7 $2 (24. Rd2) 24...
Rxh2+ $1 25. Kxh2 Qh5+ 26. Kg3 Ne2+ {he won. However, as later analysis showed,
the accurate 20 Be3! could have set Black difficult problems.}) 19. Be3 {(6)}
Be5 $5 20. Nd5 $2 {(3) A blunder.} ({The fearless} 20. g3 $1 {was correct:}
Bxg3 21. hxg3 Rxg3+ 22. Kf2 Rxf3+ $1 23. Ke1 $1 Rh3 24. Bf1 {etc.}) 20... Qh3
$1 21. Bf1 Qxh2+ {White's hopes have been dashed. However, Lanka did not play
energetically enough, and after his inaccurate 27th move the situation became
completely unclear. The time control was 45 moves in 2 hours 15 minutes, and
we made the last moves in a wild time scramble. We each had literally a minute
left, and on the 38th move I committed another blunder... --- Meanwhile, on
the neighbouring board Sturua beat Gabdrakhmanov in good positional style and
went half a point ahead. Now everything depended on the outcome of my game
with Lanka. Alas, at that moment I was a hair's breadth away from defeat:
Lanka could have won immediately on the 40th, 42nd and 43rd moves, and on the
46th he could still have retained serious winning chances. With fearful speed
we passed the time control unnoticed, and the game was adjourned only after
White's 49th move. --- The game was resumed two hours later. I analysed the
adjourned position with my Baku trainers Oleg Privorotsky and Alexander
Aslanov and their Yerevan colleague Alburt Arutyunov. The mood was not a
cheerful one: it wasn't really believed that I would manage to save the game,
and besides, everyone thought that even in the event of a draw I would catch
Sturua but would still finish second because of an inferior Buchholz score.
--- And although the situation with the Buchholz was not completely clear -
not all of the last round games had finished - the home supporters were
exulting in anticipation of a 'golden double': on the same stage Maya
Chiburdanidze had just become girls champion of the country, and it appeared
that Zurab Sturua would be about to join her.} 22. Kf2 Qh4+ 23. Ke2 Rc8 24. b3
Nc5 25. Bf2 Qh2 26. Qc2 Rg6 27. Re1 Re6 28. Kd1 Qh6 29. Be3 Qh5 30. Bxc5 Rxc5
31. b4 Rc8 32. Qe4 Kf7 33. Bd3 Rh6 34. g4 Qg5 35. f4 Qxg4+ 36. Be2 Qh4 37. Bf3
e6 38. Rh1 Qxf4 39. Rxh6 Qxh6 40. Bg4 exd5 41. Qf5+ Qf6 42. Qxh7+ Qg7 43. Qf5+
Bf6 44. Qd7+ Kg8 45. Be6+ Kh8 46. Qxg7+ Bxg7 47. Bxc8 Bxc8 48. cxd5 Bg4+ 49.
Ke1 Bb2 $6 {Not the best sealed move.} ({If} 49... Bf3 {we were planning} 50.
Rc8+ $1 Kh7 51. Rc7) ({but} 49... b5 $5 50. Rc6 Be5 {was better, when no one
could see a sure way to draw.}) 50. Rc2 $1 {An excellent defence, found by
Arutyunov.} ({After} 50. Rc4 Bf3 {White has no good continuation:} 51. Rc8+ Kg7
52. Rc7+ Kf6 53. Rxa7 Bc3+ 54. Kf1 Bxd5 {.}) 50... Bxa3 $6 {Lanka was tired
and he captured the pawn without any particular thought.} ({Some chances of
success were still offered by} 50... Be5 51. Kd2 {etc.}) 51. Rh2+ {(1)} Kg7 52.
Rg2 {(it turns out that Black loses one of his bishops)} Bxb4+ 53. Kf1 $1 ({
Apparently it was this move that was missed by Zigurds, who was expecting to
win after} 53. Kf2 $2 Bc5+ 54. Kf1 Kf6 55. Rxg4 Ke5 {. But now he does not
manage to bring his king to e5.}) 53... Kf6 54. Rxg4 Bc3 55. Re4 {(1)} (55. Ke2
{was also possible. The draw is now obvious, but here, for no earthly reason,
Lanka thought for a long time. --- That day, for the first time, we played on
the stage, and while my opponent's clock was ticking, I looked out into the
auditorium where all our delegation was sitting. And suddenly I saw how
Aslanov obviously became excited and began quickly writing something down. Of
course, I immediately grasped what was going on: Aslanov had made a mental
calculation with incredible accuracy (he had a phenomenal memory), and had
unexpectedly discovered that I had a better Buchholz score than Sturua. Not
believing such good luck, he decided to calculate it all once more - on paper.
And, realising that he was right, he began energetically gesticulating...})
55... Kf5 56. Re7 Be5 57. Rxa7 Ke4 58. Rb7 {(1)} Bd4 59. Ke2 Kxd5 60. Kd3 {. 
Times: 2.20-2.50.} (60. -- {What happened in those seconds is forever engraved
in my memory. Hardly had Lanka and I shaken hands, when the tall and corpulent
Aslanov dashed from the seventh row to the stage and with the cry: 'Garik,
Garik, you're the champion!' lifted me up in his arms. Unable to believe what
had happened, for a full hour I kept repeating to myself: 'I'm the champion,
I'm the champion...' --- It transpired that during the adjournment session a
miracle had indeed occurred. In this round my previous opponents played well,
whereas Sturua's opponents did less so. But the last to 'let him down' was his
compatriot Zurab Azmaiparashvili, who won his adjourned game against Zaid. A
draw in that game would have given us identical Buchholz scores, and then
Sturua would have been declared champion on the greater number of wins.
However, the Georgian trainers were so confident about the older Zurab's score,
that they overlooked the game of the younger, and my final Buchholz turned out
to be half a point higher! --- Thus for the first time I became junior
champion of the Soviet Union - previously no one had done this at the age of
12 (and later only Gata Kamsky achieved this in 1987). At the closing ceremony
Anatoly Bykhovsky, the senior trainer of the USSR junior team, read out the
results, congratulated Maya Chiburdanidze and all the prize-winners on their
success, and concluded his speech with these words: 'What can be said about
Garik Kasparov? When you become under-18 champion of the country at the age of
12, there is nothing more to say!' --- Today I still have this famous
photograph hanging up in my house: Maya Chiburdanidze and I stand happily on
the stage of the Chess Palace... 17th January was in fact Maya's birthday -
she was 15. And her trainer Eduard Gufeld invited everyone 'to drink to the
future world champions' (and indeed, just two and a half years later
Chiburdanidze won a match for the crown against the great Nona Gaprindashvili!)
. After this Gufeld insisted that Maya and I should play a blitz match. I
don't remember the exact score, but it was such that Maya burst into tears and
said that she needed to go not to rest, but to work...}) (60. -- {Results of
the 1976 USSR Junior Championship: 1. Kasparov and 2. Sturua - 7 out of 9; 3.
Gabdrakhmanov and 4. Vasilenko - 6½; 5-8. Lanka, Lputian, Kharitonov and
Yurtaev - 6; 9. Yusupov - 5½; 10-16. Azmaiparashvili, Dvoyris, Kengis... - 5,
24-28. M.Gurevich, Magerramov, Yudasin... - 4 etc. (altogether - 38
participants).}) (60. -- {Nikitin: 'A pleasant surprise! I felt that Garik
might play well, but I did not expect such a result. On this occasion after
the end of the tournament it was not a boy shedding tears of grief, as a year
earlier, but his mother shedding tears of happiness. After congratulating the
champion on his win, I immediately, so that he would not become conceited,
reminded him of the large number of deficiencies in his "champion's" play.'
--- From the magazine 'Shakhmaty v SSSR': 'Only one player went through
undefeated. Twelve-year-old candidate master Garik Kasparov demonstrated
outstanding independence in his assessments and conclusions. His play is
interesting and aggressive, and the young player is improving from tournament
to tournament. Of course, Garik's play is not without certain deficiencies,
but he is very self-critical, and this is a guarantee of future successes.'
--- My victory in the all-union arena was greeted euphorically by the Baku
sports officials: they were expecting me to make an immediate further surge,
and thought that I was already capable of becoming a master. And, barely
having celebrated my 13th birthday, I was included in an adult master
tournament - a memorial to the first Azerbaijan chess master, Sultan
Khalilbeyli (Baku, 11-28 May 1976). The line-up comprised four candidate
masters and ten masters: the Baku players Pavlenko, Morgulev, Listengarten,
Shakarov, Sideif-Zade and Korsunsky, plus a touring quartet - Kayumov,
Nikolaevsky, Murey and A.Donchenko.}) (60. -- {Nikitin advised me not to play
in this tournament: he felt that my nervous system was not yet ready for such
a severe test. But I very much wanted to battle against masters! Alas, my
trainer was largely right... A crisis came as early as the 2nd round, in my
game with Magerramov. After equalising in the Open Variation of the Ruy Lopez,
on the 20th move Elmar suddenly left a pawn en prise. By the 28th move I was
already just a step away from winning, but here I 'carried out a spectacular
combination with a piece sacrifice' - I made two terrible moves in a row,
overlooked a deadly counter-blow by the opponent - and capitulated! --- I was
in fact unable to recover completely from this heavy blow (whereas the
18-year-old Elmar, by contrast, quite confidently achieved the master norm,
scoring the cherished 'plus four' - 8½ out of 13). Pulling myself together,
after a draw with Shakarov I even won against Aydyn Guseynov, but then I
cracked under the fierce adult pressure, ran short of time, and lost to
Velibekov (altogether ignominiously) and Korsunsky. After the game with
Velibekov I returned home feeling crushed, lay on the divan with my face to
the wall, and burst into inconsolable sobbing. Then my mother made 'her' move:
she quietly went out to a neighbour's house and from there phoned Botvinnik in
Moscow. Within a few minutes the phone in our flat rang, and my mother called
me: 'Garinka, it's Mikhail Moiseevich, he wants to speak to you.' After a
conversation with the Teacher I calmed down and said to my mother: 'Mikhail
Moiseevich admitted that he lost games that were even worse!'}) 1/2-1/2

[Event "14: Khalilbeyli Memorial, Baku"]
[Site "?"]
[Date "1976.05.25"]
[Round "11"]
[White "Kasparov, G."]
[Black "Donchenko, A."]
[Result "1-0"]
[ECO "C97"]
[Annotator "Garry Kasparov"]
[PlyCount "75"]
[EventDate "1976.??.??"]
[Source "Everyman Chess"]
[SourceDate "2012.11.28"]

{Realising that the chance of becoming a master had been lost, I stopped
feeling nervous and finished the tournament more than convincingly. First I
won good, fighting games against Kayumov (a future winner of the Memorial) and
Murey, and after a loss to Nikolaevsky I overcome the experienced Moscow
master Anatoly Donchenko in 'iron' positional style.} 1. e4 e5 2. Nf3 Nc6 3.
Bb5 a6 4. Ba4 {(2)} Nf6 5. O-O {(6) My hesitation was due to the fact that at
that time I also used to employ both 4 Bxc6 (the influence of Fischer - and
Shakarov!)} ({and} 5. d4 {(Game No.1). However, Nikitin nevertheless insisted
that I should learn to play the 'normal Spanish'.}) 5... Be7 6. Re1 b5 7. Bb3
d6 8. c3 O-O 9. h3 Na5 10. Bc2 c5 11. d4 Qc7 12. d5 {(6)} ({I always liked
closing the centre, and besides, I had only a vague impression of the
variations with} 12. Nbd2 {.}) 12... c4 $6 {The master made this seemingly
natural move almost without thinking;} ({although} 12... Bd7) (12... Ne8) ({or
even} 12... Nc4 {is preferable, as Kuzmin played against me (Game No.31).}) 13.
b4 $1 {(13) My opponent was surprised by this set-up, which I prepared on my
own for this game, having noted Black's problems with his 'bad' queen's knight.
} cxb3 (13... Nb7 14. a4 {is also depressing for Black.}) 14. axb3 {At first
sight, Donchenko has achieved quite a good position: White has a backward pawn
on the c-file. However, he has a clear plan for mobilising his forces - Bd2,
Bd3, Na3 and so on, and if ...Nb7, then b3-b4, preventing ...Nc5 and
threatening a possible c3-c4. Gradually Black begins to suffocate due to the
congestion of his pieces and lack of space.} Bd7 (14... Nb7 {is no better:} 15.
b4 $1 Nd7 16. Be3 Nb6 17. Na3 Bd7 {(Kayumov-Dydyshko, Moscow 1979)} 18. Qe2 $1
Na4 $6 ({or} 18... Rfc8 19. Rec1) 19. c4 {with an enduring advantage.}) 15. Bd2
Rfc8 ({Or} 15... Nb7 16. b4 $1 a5 17. Bd3 Rfb8 18. Na3 Nd8 19. Qe2 {,
Kasparov-Crisofari, Bastia simul' 2008.}) 16. Bd3 {(3)} ({It is probable that} 
16. Na3 $5 {was slightly more accurate.}) 16... Be8 17. Bf1 {(7) A solid,
although non-essential move (I am not sure that the bishop stands better at f1
than at d3).} (17. Na3 $5 {was more consistent}) ({or} 17. Be3 $5 {with the
ideas of Re2-a2(c2) and Nfd2.}) 17... Nb7 $6 {Here the knight's prospects are
very obscure.} ({It would have been better to leave it at a5 and play, for
example,} 17... Bd8 $5 18. Na3 Qe7 {(b7) with the typical idea ...Bb6,
defending according to the principle 'stand and wait'. Donchenko clearly
underestimated the dangers of the impending squeeze.}) 18. b4 $1 {(2)} Nd7 19.
Na3 Nb6 20. Be3 {(8)} Bd8 ({If} 20... Bd7 {, then} 21. Qb3 $1 {and Rec1 is
strong - here} Nc4 $6 {is also unfavourable because of} 22. Bxc4 $1 bxc4 23.
Qc2 {.}) 21. Rc1 $1 {The storm clouds are gathering over Black's position:
there is the threat of Nd2 and c3-c4.} Nc4 $6 {Black no longer knows what to
do.} 22. Bxc4 $1 {I was very proud of this unexpected exchange of bishop for
knight. Black's replies are forced.} bxc4 23. Nd2 Bb5 24. Ra1 {(3) With the
unavoidable exchange on b5 and the seizure of the a-file. And the knight on b7
is still dead - White effectively has an extra piece. The conversion of the
advantage, beginning from the 18th move, makes this game a textbook example.}
h6 {(with the idea of ...Bg5, but the exchange of the dark-square bishops does
not bring Black any relief)} 25. Nxb5 {(2)} axb5 26. Nf1 Bg5 27. Re2 $1 {(2)}
Bxe3 28. Nxe3 Qd8 29. Rea2 Rab8 {Conceding the a-file in the desperate hope of
creating at least a semblance of counterplay on the kingside.} ({It did not
help to play} 29... g6 30. Ra7 Rcb8 31. R1a6 Rxa7 32. Rxa7 Qb6 {(f8)} 33. Qa1 {
with a decisive invasion}) ({or} 29... Rxa2 30. Rxa2 Ra8 31. Qa1 Rxa2 32. Qxa2
Kf8 33. Qa6 Qd7 34. Nc2 {and Na3, winning the b5-pawn, and with it the game.})
30. Ra7 {(4)} Rc7 31. R1a6 {(2)} Rd7 32. Qa1 {(7)} Kh7 33. g3 {(2)} g6 34. Rc6
h5 35. h4 {(2)} g5 $6 {Desperation: now White also has an attack on this wing.}
36. Qd1 {(2)} Kg6 37. Nf5 {(2)} Qf6 38. Qd2 {. Times: 1.24-2.12. --- Two
draws at the finish summed up my first battle with masters: 50% - 6½ out of
13. And although this was a comparative failure, I gained valuable experience.
Nikitin: 'Every cloud has a silver lining. There were several pleasing games
by Garik, in which a new and strong aspect of his playing style was revealed -
an ability to build up positional pressure move by move. This was a sure
indication that the rise of a new star was not far off...'} (38. -- {In July
1976 I went abroad for the first time - I took part in the World Cadet Cup 
(for juniors no older than 17), which was held in the small French town of
Wattignies, outside Lille. Botvinnik was against this trip, but... according
to Nikitin 'it transpired that, alas, there were no 16-year-old players of
comparable standard to our 13-year-old champion'. No other player had
represented the USSR in the international arena at such a young age! But this
was my sole achievement, and otherwise the trip brought me nothing but
disappointment. Beginning with the results of this Swiss event: 1. Grinberg -
7½ out of 9; 2. Chandler - 7; 3-6. Rogers, Petursson, Kasparov and
Groszpeter - 6 etc., followed by a few other future grandmasters - van der
Wiel, Nikolic, Hodgson, Morovic and Pia Cramling (altogether - 32 participants)
. --- I supposedly didn't perform badly: I shared 3rd-6th (although on the
tie-break the 'bronze' went to Rogers). This was how the weekly chess
newspaper 64 assessed my play: 'not bad'. But my own verdict was more severe.
I felt that I had conducted the tournament weakly and that I could have played
much better against the leaders - this upset me. The main problems when facing
older opponents were the demanding schedule and the unfamiliar surroundings.
Of course, I was excited and I experienced a certain confusion on finding
myself in a capitalist country (to put it simply, on another planet!). With me
was neither my mother, nor Nikitin - instead of one of them, the person the
Sports Committee sent with me was the Lvov trainer Viktor Kart. --- I was also
disappointed that the tournament left hardly any time to see something of
France. Before the trip I tried to find out everything about its history and
customs, and carefully studied my grandfather's map of the country. And what
happened? We simply swept past all the historical monuments I had been so
looking forward to seeing. But I couldn't help noticing that things were
substantially different to the Soviet way of life, although I was too young to
draw any conclusions from this. I simply accepted it as a fact of life, as a
result of our troubled history.}) (38. -- {At the very end of the summer, in
the Orlenok pioneers camp on the banks of the Black Sea, the next session of
the Botvinnik School was held. Nikitin: 'The teacher strictly made Garik
responsible for his oversights in Wattignies and as a sparring-partner he gave
him one of the strongest pupils - 17-year-old Sergey Dolmatov, so that the
latter would demonstrate that in the school they played better than in various
foreign championships. But the "Massacre of the Innocents" did not take place:
Garry scored 1½ out of 2, demonstrating that the concept of nervous
depression after a failure was not yet known to him.'}) (38. -- {I have
already described how Mikhail Botvinnik conducted the lessons - for example,
in Volume II of 'My Great Predecessors' (in the chapter 'My Teacher'). Here is
another sketch, from the pen of the prominent journalist Viktor Khenkin: Garik
Kasparov, the 13-year-old candidate master from Baku, is showing his game,
rattling off variations. One is struck by his erudition and general knowledge,
which are amazing for his age. But when he states that he saw all this during
the game, he is obviously making it up. --- "Don't rush, Garik, give us time
to think," Botvinnik stops him. "You can calculate variations so quickly, but
I cannot." --- Garik falls silent and gives Botvinnik a searching look. The
analysis begins. Botvinnik finds a mistake in the lad's play. --- "Why did you
play that?" --- "This move has previously occurred, and Black achieved a good
position!" --- Garik instantly gives the names of the players, the year and
the place where they met. He has a wonderful memory. --- "Never take anything
on trust", says Botvinnik. "Always question, and seek the truth. There you see,
a well-known move, and it turned out to be bad. Analyse this situation
independently, without quoting the experts. Send the analysis in writing." ---
In the meantime Garik's mother writes down the homework in a notebook. Apart
from parental duties, she also performs the role of "second trainer".}) (38. --
{From our first lessons Botvinnik sensed my striving for a dynamic, attacking
style, and in my homework he included an analysis of Alekhine's games. And at
the age of 13 I wrote an essay on the topic 'Games of the early Alekhine'! But
Botvinnik warned me against being carried away by complexity for its own sake,
and on one occasion he said: 'You'll never become an Alekhine if the
variations control you, and not the other way round.' This upset me, but of
course the Teacher was right. Later he wrote about this episode: 'Kasparov
stood out among the other pupils by his ability very skilfully to calculate
variations many moves ahead. But Garry was an excitable lad, and I had to
insist that he thought about a move before making it on the board. And I often
said to him that there was a danger of him becoming a new Larsen or Taimanov.'}
) 1-0

[Event "15: Trans-Caucasian Youth, Tbilisi"]
[Site "?"]
[Date "1976.10.16"]
[Round "2"]
[White "Lputian, S."]
[Black "Kasparov, G."]
[Result "0-1"]
[ECO "E80"]
[Annotator "Garry Kasparov"]
[PlyCount "76"]
[EventDate "1976.??.??"]
[Source "Everyman Chess"]
[SourceDate "2012.11.28"]

{In October 1976 the Trans-Caucasian Youth Games were held in Tbilisi. There
was a match-tournament of four teams: Azerbaijani, Armenian and two from
Georgia. In this event I was fortunate enough to gain one of my most brilliant
King's Indian wins. --- My opponent was 18-year-old Smbat Lputian, with whom I
was later on friendly terms. We had been competing at the board since the
spring of 1973, when in a friendly Azerbaijan-Armenia match Smbat lost with
White, but twice defeated me with Black in the French Defence. But those were
his first and last victories! That same summer we drew in the All-Union Youth
Games in Vilnius, and then I began beating him game after game (Lputian made
his next draw with me - in 2000, when he had already long been a grandmaster).
Of course, on that memorable autumn day my friend and rival was dreaming of
revenge.} 1. d4 Nf6 2. c4 g6 3. Nc3 Bg7 4. e4 d6 5. f3 Nc6 6. Be3 a6 7. Qd2 ({
Korchnoi replied} 7. Nge2 Rb8 8. Nc1 {- Game No.12.}) 7... Rb8 8. Rb1 ({The
usual line is} 8. Nge2 {(Game No.87). But Smbat sees that for the sake of
creating counterplay on the queenside Black is delaying castling, and he tries
to get his attack in first.}) 8... O-O {(3)} 9. b4 ({After} 9. Nge2 b5 (9...
Re8 $5) 10. cxb5 axb5 11. b4 e5 12. dxe5 (12. d5 Ne7 13. Ng3 {(c1) is more
solid, with hopes of an advantage}) 12... Nxe5 13. Nd4 Bb7 14. Bxb5 d5 $1 15.
exd5 Nxd5 16. Nxd5 Bxd5 {Black has excellent compensation for the pawn 
(Lputian-Lanka, Baku 1979).}) 9... e5 {(25) Impatience!} ({Later I discussed
this position with Gufeld and we came to the conclusion that the waiting move} 
9... Bd7 $5 {was more subtle:} 10. Nge2 Re8 (10... b5 $6 {is premature in view
of} 11. cxb5 axb5 12. d5 Ne5 13. Nd4) 11. a3 e6 {, and if the white knight
moves from e2, then immediately ...e6-e5 and if d4-d5 - ...Nd4.}) 10. d5 Nd4 {
(2)} 11. Nge2 {This is Lputian's idea: White places his knight on e2 straight
away, without losing time on Nge2-c1-e2.} c5 $1 {What else?} (11... Nxe2 12.
Bxe2 {would merely have assisted White's development.}) 12. dxc6 bxc6 ({It
would appear that} 12... Nxc6 $5 {is also acceptable:} 13. b5 ({Stohl's
recommendation} 13. Bg5 {is ineffective because of} h6 $1 14. Bxh6 Nxe4 $1 15.
Nxe4 Qh4+ 16. g3 Qxh6) 13... Na5 14. Ng3 {(Crouch)} axb5 15. Nxb5 Be6 {.
However, I felt that the pawn sacrifice was more in the spirit of this
variation, even if it was for problematic compensation.}) 13. Nxd4 exd4 14.
Bxd4 Re8 $5 {(5)} (14... c5 15. bxc5 Nxe4 $1 {suggested itself, but I did not
like the endgame arising by force after} 16. fxe4 Rxb1+ $1 ({all the
commentators began with} 16... Qh4+ $2 {, allowing} 17. Ke2 $1 {, which is
advantageous to White}) 17. Nxb1 Qh4+ 18. Kd1 (18. Ke2 $2 Bg4+) 18... Qxe4 19.
Bxg7 Qxb1+ 20. Qc1 Bg4+ 21. Kd2 Qxc1+ 22. Kxc1 Kxg7 23. cxd6 Rd8 24. c5 Rc8 25.
Bxa6 Rxc5+ 26. Kb2 {- suggested by Gufeld in 'Informator' and continued by
Crouch as far as} Rc6 27. Bb5 Rxd6 28. Kc3 {, when 'the outside passed pawn
presents something of a problem for Black'. However, one which is by no means
fatal:} Kf6 {(f8)} 29. a4 (29. Re1 Be6) 29... Ke7 30. a5 Kd8 31. a6 Kc7 {,
gaining a draw. --- At any event, I decided for the moment to defer any blows
in the centre, the ideas of which had already taken vague shape in my mind.})
15. Be2 $6 (15. b5 $6 axb5 16. cxb5 d5 $1 {is dubious for White (Stohl).}) ({
But Lputian had two stronger and safer continuations:} 15. Bd3 {(Gufeld)} d5 $1
16. cxd5 cxd5 17. e5 Nd7 18. f4 f6 {(Stohl)} 19. O-O fxe5 20. Ba7 $1 Rb7 ({or} 
20... Ra8 21. Bxg6 $1 Rxa7 22. Bxe8 Qxe8 23. Qxd5+ Kh8 24. Rbe1 {with very
complicated play, quite favourable for White}) 21. Bf2 Ra7 22. Rbe1 {.}) (15.
a3 a5 16. b5 cxb5 17. cxb5 d5 18. Bxf6 Qxf6 19. Nxd5 Qd6 20. Bc4 ({after} 20.
a4 f5 $1 21. Bc4 Kh8 {Black has good counter-chances}) 20... Qxa3 21. Qe3 Qxe3+
22. Nxe3 {(Crouch) with an extra pawn and a safe position for White (although
Black's powerful bishop on g7 and his passed a-pawn compensate for the slight
material deficit).}) 15... c5 $1 16. bxc5 ({In the event of} 16. Be3 cxb4 17.
Nd1 (17. Nd5 $2 Nxd5 18. Qxd5 Be6 {- Stohl}) 17... Qa5) ({or} 16. Bxf6 Bxf6 17.
O-O cxb4 (17... Be5 $5) 18. Nd5 Bg5 $5 ({Stohl's move} 18... a5 {is also good})
19. f4 Bh6 {Black has no reason for complaint. But now he solves his problems
with an unusual dynamic possibility, breaking through at virtually the most
fortified point in the opponent's position.}) 16... Nxe4 $3 {(1) A stunning
blow, exploiting the overloading of the knight on c3. 'It is interesting that
from the 10th to the 24th move Garik spent only 15 (!) minutes, although the
entire lengthy combination with the transition into a won endgame was not
prepared at home. But the ideas implemented were not new to him: they had
become a technical weapon after his persistent independent work on the study
of classic King's Indian games.' (Nikitin)} 17. fxe4 Qh4+ 18. g3 $2 {Smbat
made this move quite confidently. It stands to reason that, if he had seen
what awaited him, he would have played differently.} ({He had three other
possibilities:} 18. Kd1 $2 Rxb1+ 19. Nxb1 Qxe4 20. Bxg7 Qxb1+ 21. Qc1 Qxc1+ 22.
Kxc1 Kxg7 23. Kd2 dxc5 {, and Black is a sound pawn to the good}) (18. Kf1 $6
Rxb1+ 19. Nxb1 Qxe4 20. Bxg7 Qxb1+ {and now:} 21. Bd1 (21. Bd1 Kxg7 22. cxd6
Re6 23. Qd4+ Kg8 $1 ({Stohl's move} 23... Rf6+ {is unclear because of} 24. Ke1
$1) 24. Kf2 (24. c5 $2 Re4 $1 {and wins}) 24... Qxa2+ 25. Kg3 Qa3+ 26. Bf3 Rxd6
27. Qe5 Re6 28. Qd4 Qe7 {also with an extra pawn, the conversion of which,
however, is not easy}) (21. Qd1 Qf5+ 22. Bf3 Kxg7 23. cxd6 ({Crouch's move} 23.
Qd4+ {(?!) is weaker in view of} Kg8 24. cxd6 Bb7 $1) 23... -- ({, and now not
} 23... Be6 $6 24. Qd4+ Kg8 25. Kf2 $1 Qc2+ 26. Kg3 Qxc4 {with a draw 
(Quigley-Henry, Chicago 1987)} (26... --)) ({, but} 23... Qe5 {(here Stohl
considers} 24. Kf2 {(?)} Qe3+ 25. Kg3 {to be 'drawn', overlooking the deadly}
Re4 $1 {)}) ({, or} 23... Qf4 {(c5) with an unpleasant initiative for the pawn}
))) (18. Bf2 $1 {(the only move to maintain the balance)} Bxc3 19. Bxh4 Rxb1+
20. Kf2 Bxd2 21. Rxb1 dxc5 22. Rb8 ({this is rather more forceful than Stohl
and Crouch's move} 22. Bd3) 22... Bf4 ({or} 22... Bc3 23. Bg5) 23. Ra8 Be5 24.
Bg5 Bd4+ 25. Be3 {and the endgame is a draw.}) 18... Rxb1+ 19. Kf2 ({Of course,
not} 19. Nxb1 $2 Qxe4 {. I remember that after this move Smbat was about to
stand up from the board (indicating that everything was clear - it was time
for Black to resign), but I did not allow him to stand up, instantly moving my
rook one square.}) 19... Rb2 $3 {One of my trademark combinations, conceived
thanks to very rapid calculation and a sharp feeling for dynamics: I used to
see such tricks immediately! Stohl associates this finish with the brilliant
win by the 13-year-old Fischer over Donald Byrne (Game No.50 in Volume IV of
'My Great Predecessors'). --- During a game Lputian was normally imperturbable,
but at that moment, on seeing my move, his face changed - it was clear to him
that disaster had struck. Nevertheless Smbat found comparatively the best
chance, involving an exchange sacrifice.} 20. gxh4 ({Of course, not} 20. Qxb2
$2 Bxd4+ 21. Ke1 Bxc3+ 22. Qxc3 Qxe4 {and wins.}) 20... Rxd2 21. Bxg7 Kxg7 22.
Ke3 Rc2 {(2)} ({Here I realised that I would have to return the exchange: after
} 22... Rb2 $2 23. cxd6 f5 24. c5 {White's passed pawns are too strong.}) 23.
Kd3 Rxc3+ $1 {(2)} ({Again in the event of} 23... Rb2 $2 24. cxd6 f5 25. Bf3 ({
or} 25. Rc1 fxe4+ 26. Ke3 {Black cannot break through.})) 24. Kxc3 dxc5 25. Bd3
Bb7 {(2) Although material is equal, White's pawn weaknesses make his
position lost.} 26. Re1 (26. Rb1 $6 Bxe4 27. Rb6 Bxd3 28. Kxd3 Re6 {- Stohl.})
26... Re5 $1 {This accurate move is 'the last nail in the coffin' (Nikitin).} (
{And indeed, Gufeld's suggestion} 26... f5 {(?)} 27. e5 Be4 28. Bxe4 Rxe5 {
after} 29. Kd3 {would have led only to a draw:} Kf6 30. h3 h6 31. Re2 fxe4+ 32.
Rxe4 Kf5 33. Rxe5+ Kxe5 34. Ke3 Kf5 35. Kf3 a5 36. h5 $1 g5 37. a4 Ke5 38. Ke3
{.}) 27. a4 (27. Re2 Rh5 28. e5 Bc8 $1 {and wins - Stohl.}) 27... f5 {(12)} 28.
Rb1 Bxe4 {So, Black has won a pawn and White's counterplay on the queenside is
too late, since the passed f-pawn advances swiftly towards the queening square.
} 29. Rb6 (29. a5 Bxd3 30. Kxd3 f4 {, etc., was also hopeless for White.})
29... f4 $1 {(3) Nearly all Black's moves from the 15th to the end of the
game are the first line given by the computer!} 30. Rxa6 f3 $1 (30... Bxd3 $2
31. Kxd3 f3 {was inaccurate because of} 32. Ra7+ Kf6 33. Ra8 {- Stohl.}) 31.
Bf1 ({Or} 31. Ra7+ Kf6 $1 32. Bxe4 (32. Bf1 Bf5) 32... Rxe4 33. Ra8 Ke7 34.
Ra7+ Ke6 35. Ra8 Rxh4 36. Rf8 Rh3 37. a5 Ke7 $1 38. Rf4 g5 39. Rf5 g4 {and ...Rxh2, winning.}) 31... Bf5 $1 {With the threat of ...Re1.} 32. Ra7+ Kh6 33. Kd2
f2 34. Be2 Bg4 35. Bd3 Re1 36. Rf7 Bf5 $1 37. a5 Bxd3 {(2)} 38. Rxf2 Rf1 $1 {
. Times: 1.46-1.10. --- Nikitin: 'The complexity of the young player's ideas,
the accuracy of implementation and the broad range of techniques employed
create a great impression.'} 0-1

[Event "Simultaneous, Tbilisi"]
[Site "?"]
[Date "1976.??.??"]
[Round "?"]
[White "Romanishin, O."]
[Black "Kasparov, G."]
[Result "0-1"]
[ECO "A03"]
[Annotator "Garry Kasparov"]
[PlyCount "32"]
[EventDate "1976.??.??"]
[Source "Everyman Chess"]
[SourceDate "2012.11.28"]

{In November my Pioneers Palace team failed by a miracle to win the next
qualifier for the final 'tournament of young hopes', although on top board I
scored 6½ out of 7. Perhaps this was for the best: I was already facing
other tasks. During the qualifying tournament the Lvov grandmaster Oleg
Romanishin gave a demonstration simul' against the leading young players.
Against me he played} 1. f4 {, but after} d5 2. Nf3 Nf6 3. e3 Bg4 4. b3 Nbd7 5.
Bb2 c6 6. Be2 Qc7 7. O-O Bxf3 8. Bxf3 e5 9. d3 Bd6 10. g3 O-O-O 11. c4 dxc4 12.
bxc4 h5 $1 13. Qc2 h4 14. Nc3 hxg3 15. hxg3 exf4 16. exf4 g5 $1 {, Black won
with a direct attack on the king. --- At the end of 1976 a noteworthy event
occurred in the life of Alexander Nikitin - a clash with the all-powerful
Anatoly Karpov (this is described in Volume IV of My Great Predecessors). At
the demand of the world champion my Moscow trainer was dismissed from the
chess section of the USSR Sports Committee. Nikitin: 'When I left, I publicly
promised to dethrone Karpov! Everyone knew what would be done for that. From
then on my training work with the young candidate master acquired a new,
powerful stimulus.' --- That year is also memorable for me in that I began
individual lessons with Alexander Shakarov, who, in contrast to Privorotsky,
placed the emphasis on opening preparation. We did a great amount of work on
expanding and renovating my opening repertoire. For White we thoroughly
prepared 1 d4, for Black - the Caro-Kann Defence, and so on. By the end of
December I had the feeling that I was moving on to some new level. The results
were soon seen...} 0-1

[Event "?"]
[Site "?"]
[Date "????.??.??"]
[Round "?"]
[White "Two-Times Champion!"]
[Black "?"]
[Result "*"]
[Annotator "Garry Kasparov"]
[PlyCount "1"]
[EventDate "1984.??.??"]
[SourceDate "2012.12.06"]

{In January 1977 I set off to Riga for my third USSR Junior Championship. It
is well known that it is always more difficult to defend a title than to win
it: against the champion everyone plays with redoubled energy. Especially
since among the participants in the traditional Swiss there were, as usual, a
number of experienced fighters, including masters - my rival of the previous
year, Sturua, as well as Taborov and Yusupov, who had only just achieved the
title. --- I made my usual good start - 3½ out of 4. I remember my win with
Black against the Yerevan player Eolian in what was a new opening for me - the
Caro-Kann Defence. Tal: 'Soon after it had finished, I happened to analyse
with Kasparov his game with Eolian. And again I was staggered by the wealth of
variations and ideas that the junior from Baku put into effect during this
rather tense encounter.'} 1. -- {After four rounds I was leading the race
together with 15-year old Evgeny Pigusov from Kemerovo, one of the strongest
young players in Russia, a future grandmaster and, incidentally, one of my
seconds in the match with Anand (1995). In the 5th round the crucial duel
between the leaders took place (see the following game).} *

[Event "16: USSR Junior Championship, Riga"]
[Site "?"]
[Date "1977.01.11"]
[Round "5"]
[White "Kasparov, G."]
[Black "Pigusov, E."]
[Result "1-0"]
[ECO "D36"]
[Annotator "Garry Kasparov"]
[PlyCount "73"]
[EventDate "1977.??.??"]
[Source "Everyman Chess"]
[SourceDate "2012.11.28"]

1. d4 {This was the third time I tried this move in a serious game (I first
played it in team competitions at the end of 1976 against Eolian and Sturua).
I don't remember who first advised me to adopt 1 d4 - Botvinnik or Makogonov.
But the result was that the closed games began to dominate in my repertoire,
although periodically, especially in the 1990s, I almost exclusively played 1
e4.} d5 2. c4 e6 3. Nc3 Nf6 4. Nf3 Nbd7 {A surprise.} ({After the usual} 4...
Be7 {at that time I used to employ the variation with} 5. Bf4 {. But now the
Karlsbad Variation arises.}) 5. cxd5 exd5 6. Bg5 Be7 7. e3 c6 8. Bd3 O-O 9. O-O
Re8 10. Qc2 (10. h3 Nf8 11. Bf4 {followed by 0-0-0 is also possible (Game No.
42 in Volume III of 'My Great Predecessors').}) 10... Nf8 11. Rae1 (11. Rab1 {
and b2-b4-b5 is a routine and age-old plan. But I used to treat my favourite
Karlsbad Variation like Marshall and Botvinnik - I prepared Ne5, f2-f4 and an
attack on the kingside.}) 11... Ng6 $6 ({The classical tabiya after} 11... Ne4
12. Bxe7 Qxe7 13. Bxe4 dxe4 14. Nd2 f5 (14... b6 15. Qa4 $1 {,
Botvinnik-Robatsch, Amsterdam 1966}) 15. f3 $1 exf3 16. Nxf3 Be6 17. e4 fxe4
18. Rxe4 {(Marshall-Rubinstein, Moscow 1925) seemed to me to be quite
promising for White, but modern practice has shown that Black is close to
equality.}) 12. Ne5 {(4)} Nd7 ({One of my 1976 games went} 12... Nxe5 13. dxe5
Ng4 14. Bxe7 Qxe7 15. f4 Qh4 $6 16. h3 Nxe3 17. Rxe3 d4 18. Re4 $1 dxc3 19. f5
{with an attack.}) ({If} 12... Ng4 {there would also have followed} 13. Bxe7
Qxe7 14. f4 $1 ({but not} 14. Nxg4 Bxg4 15. f3 Bd7 16. e4 Qb4 17. Qf2 Nf4 {
with equality, Bagirov-Zilberstein, Baku 1972.})) 13. Bxe7 Qxe7 {Here the
theory came to an end, and we began creating at the board.} ({In the event of} 
13... Rxe7 14. f4 Ngf8 (14... Ndxe5 $6 15. fxe5 {is weaker}) 15. -- ({, White
should not rush with} 15. e4 $6 {(Udovcic-Robatsch, Maribor 1967), in view of
the relieving manoeuvre} dxe4 16. Nxe4 Nf6 {.}) ({. However,} 15. Qf2 {is
quite good, with the idea of} f6 16. Nf3 {, when Black has an unpleasant
position.} (16. --))) 14. f4 {(15)} Ngf8 $6 {With the queen on e7 this is not
the best choice;} ({although White's chances are also better after} 14... Ndxe5
15. fxe5) ({or} 14... Nf6 15. h3 $5 {.}) 15. e4 $1 {(9)} ({Now the
breakthrough in the centre suggests itself, since both} 15. e4 dxe4 $6 ({and} 
15... Nf6 $2 16. exd5 $1) 16. Nxe4 Nf6 $2 17. Nxc6 $1 {followed by Nxf6+ are
bad for Black.}) 15... Nxe5 ({If} 15... Qb4 {, then simply} 16. Qf2 {.}) 16.
fxe5 ({The initiative would also have been retained by} 16. exd5 $5 Nf3+ 17.
gxf3 Qd8 (17... Qxe1 $6 18. Rxe1 Rxe1+ 19. Kf2 Re8 20. f5 {is worse for Black})
18. f5 Bd7 19. Kh1 {etc.}) 16... Be6 17. exd5 Bxd5 18. Nxd5 $6 {(8) A
premature exchange, opening the c-file for Black. The bishop was nicely but
ineffectively placed, and it could not move in view of the threat of Ne4-d6.} (
{Thus White should have considered} 18. Rf4 $5 {.}) 18... cxd5 19. Bf5 {This
move, taking control of the c8-square, was one that I was proud of at the time.
} ({Nothing would have been given by either} 19. Qb3 Ne6 $1) ({or} 19. Rf3 Qh4
$1 {.}) ({However,} 19. Re3 $5 {was sharper and more interesting, with the
idea of} Qh4 ({or} 19... Qb4 20. Qf2) 20. Qa4 {.}) 19... Qb4 {By attacking the
d4-pawn, Black diverts the queen from c2 and prepares ...Ne6.} 20. Rd1 {(6)} h6
(20... g6 21. Bg4 Ne6 {was also possible. It is now apparent that White has
delayed somewhere.}) 21. Qf2 {(2)} Re7 {A solid move, after which I stopped to
think: what to do next?} (21... Ne6 {was also suitable, not fearing} 22. Bxe6 (
{here} 22. Bg4 {(b1) is better, still with hopes of an advantage}) 22... fxe6
23. Qf7+ Kh8 {.}) 22. Rd3 {(31)} Rc7 ({After} 22... Ne6 $5 {it would have been
harder for me to find an effective plan for strengthening my position.}) 23.
Rb3 $1 {(7) The start of 'grand manoeuvres' by the white rook and the black
queen.} Qe7 $6 (23... Qa4 {is more active, eyeing the a2-pawn and continuing
to attack the d4-pawn, although after} 24. Rc3 $5 Rxc3 25. bxc3 Re8 26. Bc2 Qd7
27. Bb3 ({or first} 27. Qf3 {White has some pressure.})) 24. Rg3 {(3)} Ne6 (
24... Rc6 $6 25. Qd2 $1 {.}) 25. Qe3 {(5)} Kh8 26. h3 {(4) With the intention
of Kh2. White's threats on the kingside are mounting.} Qb4 $2 {(reckless - the
rook on a8 should have been brought up to the defence)} 27. Rg4 $2 {(2)} (27.
Bxe6 fxe6 28. Rf6 $1 {with an attack was very strong, but again I did not want
to exchange my bishop...}) 27... Qxb2 28. Kh2 {(7) In the future such a
'quiet' preparatory king move was to become one of my favourite devices.} Qb4
$2 {An unfortunate retreat by the queen;} ({here every instant is precious!} 
28... Rc3 $1 {would have led to sharp play:} 29. Qe1 ({the commentators
recommended} 29. Bd3 {, but after} Qa3 ({or} 29... Rf8 {Black holds on})) 29...
Ng5 $1 {(with the threats of ...Rxh3+ and ...Nf3+!)} 30. Rf2 ({or} 30. Rgf4 Rg8
) 30... Qb4 $1 {.}) 29. Bd3 $2 {(5)} ({Again rejecting} 29. Bxe6 fxe6 30. Rf6
$1 Qe7 (30... Kh7 31. Rh4) 31. Rxh6+ gxh6 32. Qxh6+ Qh7 33. Qf6+ Rg7 34. Rh4 {
with a straightforward win.}) 29... Qe7 $2 {The decisive mistake - Pigusov
overlooked my reply.} ({If} 29... Rac8 {there was the unpleasant} 30. Rf6 $1
Ng5 31. Rd6 {with the threats of Rxd5 and h3-h4.}) ({But} 29... Qf8 {was more
resilient.}) 30. Rf6 $1 Ng5 (30... Qf8 {was now too late in view of} 31. Qf3 $1
{with the threats of Rxh6+ and Qf5.}) 31. Rxg5 $1 {(2)} hxg5 32. Qxg5 Kg8 33.
Qh4 ({Or} 33. Qf5 {(h5), also with an irresistible attack.}) 33... Qa3 {The
poor queen cannot find anywhere to go.} ({However, things would also have been
hopeless after} 33... g6 34. Bxg6 $1 fxg6 35. Rxg6+) ({or} 33... Qd8 34. Qh7+
Kf8 35. Qh8+ (35. Rf3 $5) 35... Ke7 36. Qxg7 Qg8 37. Qh6 $1 {.}) 34. Rf3 {More
than good enough to win;} ({although} 34. Qh7+ Kf8 35. Qh8+ Ke7 36. Qxg7 Rf8
37. Rd6 $1 {was more forceful.}) 34... g6 35. Bxg6 Qxf3 36. Qh7+ Kf8 37. gxf3 {
. Times: 2.05-2.13. --- Despite the mistakes, this was an important win for
me, after which I sensed the first signs of approaching chess maturity, and
the forming of my trademark style: increasing pressure and a sudden mating
finish! Nikitin: 'This game was one of those that evoked happy memories in
Botvinnik: this was roughly how he used to win during the years of his chess
supremacy.'} 1-0

[Event "17: USSR Junior Championship, Riga"]
[Site "?"]
[Date "1977.01.12"]
[Round "6"]
[White "Lanka, Z."]
[Black "Kasparov, G."]
[Result "0-1"]
[ECO "B19"]
[Annotator "Garry Kasparov"]
[PlyCount "74"]
[EventDate "1977.??.??"]
[Source "Everyman Chess"]
[SourceDate "2012.11.28"]

{After taking the sole lead, the next day I again employed the Caro-Kann
Defence with Black, this time against my previous year's 'tormentor' Zigurds
Lanka. This is what Tal wrote about my play in this game: 'A big impression
was made by his queen manoeuvres on moves 18-19, prepared together with his
second, the thoughtful master Alexander Shakarov, and then the elegant
'cavalry dance'. After exchanging all White's active pieces, the Baku junior
broke through with his rook into the enemy rear, and the loss of material for
White became inevitable.'} 1. e4 c6 2. d4 d5 3. Nc3 dxe4 4. Nxe4 Bf5 {In my
choice Tal keenly discerned the influence of Makogonov and Botvinnik. But the
main point was that the Caro-Kann Defence was a favourite of Shakarov, who had
discovered several 'holes' in Boleslavsky's opening analyses. It was while
studying the complicated positions, arising here deep in the middlegame, that
I developed a liking for long forcing variations.} 5. Ng3 Bg6 6. h4 ({In the
4th round Eolian played} 6. Bc4 {against me, but after} e6 7. N1e2 Nf6 8. O-O (
{or} 8. Nf4 Bd6 {, Tal-Botvinnik, 17th match game, Moscow 1960; 2nd match game,
1961}) 8... Bd6 9. f4 Qd7 $5 {recommended by Boleslavsky;} (9... Qc7 10. f5 $1)
10. Kh1 $6 h5 $1 11. f5 exf5 12. Nf4 Bxf4 13. Rxf4 h4 $1 14. Qe1+ Kf8 15. Ne2
h3 {he did not gain the desired compensation for the pawn.}) 6... h6 7. Nf3 Nd7
8. h5 Bh7 9. Bd3 Bxd3 10. Qxd3 e6 {(2)} 11. Bd2 Ngf6 12. Qe2 ({At that time a
popular line, which had temporarily supplanted the usual} 12. O-O-O Qc7 13. Qe2
({or} 13. Ne4 {(Game No.29).})) 12... Qc7 13. c4 Bd6 $1 (13... O-O-O 14. Ne5 ({
or} 14. c5 {, Karpov-Hort, Ljubljana 1975.})) 14. Nf5 O-O $5 {(2)} ({An
analytical development with respect to the 8th game of the Spassky-Karpov
Candidates match (1974), which went} 14... Bf4 15. Bxf4 Qxf4 16. Ne3 {(Game No.
62 in Volume V of 'My Great Predecessors').}) (14... O-O-O $6 {is less good:}
15. Nxd6+ Qxd6 16. Ba5 $1 Rde8 17. Ne5 $1 {(Karpov-Pomar, Nice Olympiad 1974).
--- 'Kasparov employed a paradoxical continuation which, to all appearances,
was a marked improvement for Black' (Tal). For those times this was a rather
revolutionary conception: Black castles into mate! However, according to our
analyses, after an early ...b7-b5 he had adequate counter-chances.}) 15. Nxd6
Qxd6 16. Rh4 ({Black is not caused any problems by} 16. Bc3 b5 $1 17. cxb5 cxb5
18. Qxb5 Nd5 19. Ne5 Nxe5 20. dxe5 Nxc3 21. bxc3 Qc7 {(Beliavsky-Bagirov, Baku
1977; Kapengut-Kasparov, Daugavpils 1978).}) (16. O-O-O {is more critical:} b5
$1 17. g4 $1 (17. cxb5 cxb5 18. Kb1 b4 19. Ne5 Nd5 {with counterplay on the
queenside, Lukin-Gorshkov, Chelyabinsk 1975}) 17... bxc4 (17... Nxg4 $5 18.
Rhg1 f5 {is also unclear}) 18. g5 hxg5 19. h6 g6 20. h7+ Nxh7 21. Nxg5 Nxg5 22.
Bxg5 {, but here too after} c3 $1 (22... f6 $2 23. Qe4 {with an attack,
Mnatsakanian-Bagirov, Kirovakan 1978}) {, White has no more than a draw:} 23.
Qe5 $5 cxb2+ 24. Kb1 Qxe5 $1 25. dxe5 f6 $1 26. Rxd7 fxg5 27. Rhh7 {. --- On
encountering a new variation for the first time, Lanka made a rather mediocre
move with his rook. White's idea is understandable: avoiding 16 0-0-0 b5!, he
wants to hide his king on f1 and play g2-g4-g5 or Ne5. But nothing useful
comes of this.}) 16... b5 $1 {(10)} 17. Kf1 bxc4 {(3)} 18. Qxc4 Qd5 $1 {(10) 
By offering to go into an endgame, Black emphasises White's main problem in
such positions - the weakness of the h5-pawn. After some thought, Lanka
decided to give it up immediately, but to keep the queens on.} 19. Qe2 $6 (19.
Rc1 {was nevertheless better.}) 19... Qb5 $6 {(5) Insisting on an endgame -
that is what Makogonov taught!} ({The 'Greek gift' could perfectly well have
been accepted -} 19... Nxh5 $1 {, not fearing} 20. g4 Nhf6 21. g5 hxg5 22. Bxg5
Qb5 {(f5)} ({or} 22... Rfb8 $5 {with a good game. But I didn't use to capture
such pawns: why open lines for the enemy pieces?})) 20. b3 a5 {(4)} 21. Ne5 a4
{(6)} 22. Rh3 $6 {A poor move.} ({White could still have maintained equality by
} 22. Nxd7 Nxd7 23. b4) ({or} 22. b4 $1 {with counterplay on the c-file.})
22... Rfd8 $1 {(2) A very strong reply;} (22... Rfd8 {excluding} 23. b4 $2 ({
White is forced to exchange queens - immediately or after} 23. Be1 Nd5) 23...
Nxe5 {, in view of} 24. dxe5 Rxd2 {.}) 23. Qxb5 cxb5 {(getting rid of the
weakness on c6)} 24. Nc6 {Lanka forces a modest withdrawal by the black rook.
But this temporary activity does not compensate for the defects of White's
position: the d4- and h5-pawns are weak, and the d5-point is under Black's
complete control.} Re8 25. bxa4 bxa4 $6 {(2)} (25... Rxa4 $1 26. a3 ({or} 26.
Rb3 Nb8 $1) 26... Nd5 {was more accurate, driving the knight from c6 and
beginning a pursuit of the white pawns.}) 26. Rc1 Nb6 {(4)} 27. Ne5 $6 ({The
knight should not have been moved away -} 27. Ke2 $1 {was more sensible.})
27... Rec8 {(13) Now White's position deteriorates.} 28. Rb1 ({Possibly it
made sense to sacrifice the h5-pawn -} 28. Rhc3 $5 Rxc3 29. Rxc3 {with the
idea of} Nxh5 ({although after} 29... Nbd5 $1 {all the same Black would have
retained the advantage}) 30. Rc7 $1 {.}) 28... Nc4 (28... Nbd5 $5 29. Be1 Rc2 {
was even more unpleasant, but as it is White has a difficult position, and
Lanka loses it very quickly.}) 29. Be1 Nd5 {(8)} 30. Rb7 ({Solid moves such as
} 30. Rd3) ({or} 30. Nd7 {were more resilient.}) 30... Nd6 {Zigurds obviously
overlooked this retreat.} 31. Rb2 $6 (31. Rd7 Ra6 32. Nd3 $1 {really was
better, although after} Nf6 33. Nc5 Nxd7 34. Nxa6 Nb5 {White would have faced
a difficult defence.}) 31... Rab8 $6 ({Missing} 31... Rc1 $1 {with a quick win.
}) 32. Rxb8 Rxb8 33. Nd7 $2 {The decisive mistake.} (33. Ra3 Ra8 {was the only
way to resist.}) 33... Rb1 $1 {(8)} 34. Ra3 Nc4 $1 {The triumph of the black
knights!} 35. Rd3 (35. Rxa4 Nd2+ $1 36. Ke2 Nc3+ $1 {.}) 35... Ra1 {(2)} 36. g3
Rxa2 37. Nc5 a3 {. Times: 1.55-1.25. --- An important game, showing that my
play was becoming more profound and that with Black I could successfully
employ not only the Sicilian, but also a comparatively quiet positional
opening. Behind this stood both intensive sessions with Shakarov, and
conversations with Makogonov... The broadening of my opening repertoire also
did not escape the attention of the experts and the press.} (37... -- {That
which happened at the finish was not expected by anyone: in a tense struggle I
managed to win all my remaining games - against Kengis, Yusupov and Sturua -
and to finish ahead of the second prize-winner by two points! The results of
the 1977 USSR Junior Championship: 1. Kasparov - 8½ out of 9; 2. Chernin -
6½; 3. Yusupov, 4-6. Eolian, Lanka and Taborov - 6; 7-10. Sturua, Kuporosov,
Pigusov and Gabdrakhmanov - 5½, followed by Kengis, Yurtaev, Ehlvest,
Epishin and Rozentalis, etc. (altogether 36 participants).}) (37... -- {A
second successive victory in the junior championship of the country, and with
a record score - at the age of 13 no one had achieved this! Tal called it a 'a
highly promising announcement'. Petrosian and Korchnoi, who did the 'golden
double' in 1946 and 1948, were almost 17 years old... --- Pavel Dembo, the
'Sovietsky' sport correspondent: 'Kasparov confidently retained his champion's
title. It was not just that the first time he won it thanks to the better
tie-break, and the second time "cleanly", conceding only half a point in nine
rounds. It was his qualitatively different play: the 12-year-old Garik, like
most of his contemporaries, saw before him only one target - the enemy king -
and he played for mate, whereas the 13-year-old Garik, now in contrast to most
of his contemporaries, has a confident mastery of many types of chess weapon,
which at the championship he convincingly demonstrated.' --- Anatoly Bykhovsky:
'Kasparov's play was wide-ranging: he conducted an excellent attack in his
game with Pigusov, won in purely positional style against Lanka and Sturua,
resourcefully and tenaciously defended in his game with Yusupov, and caught
Gitsyn in the opening. This wide-ranging and diverse arsenal of playing
methods was demonstrated by a boy of just thirteen years old!'}) (37... -- {
Azerbaijan sports journalists unanimously named me the 'January laureate' in a
competition for the best sportsmen of the republic. Regarding this ex-world
champion Mikhail Tal wrote an article for the Baku Sport newspaper: 'Back in
1974, at the opening of the All-Union Tournament of Pioneers Palaces, I
noticed a likeable, bright, dark-eyed boy. I was told that he was the youngest
participant and that his name was Garik. At the time I did not know him. But
two days later, "battling" in the capacity of Riga captain against the young
Baku players, I was able to assess this young talent. In the end I managed to
beat him, but I have to admit that it was very pleasant to observe how at the
board he quickly and easily found the most unexpected tactical blows. Some
time passed. Frankly speaking, we, the players of the older generation, relate
to our young colleagues with a certain degree of scepticism. This made it all
the more unexpected when many experienced Moscow masters began saying things
like: "In Baku there is a boy - Garik Kasparov, who makes an excellent
impression". I heard this from the mouths of international master Dvoretsky
and national master Nikitin. Both of them, so to speak in their line of duty,
have worked with the Baku player and have the right to make their judgement. I
remember that when in Holland I was analysing an opening variation with
Dvoretsky, he literally took me aback by showing a very unexpected move, at
the same time clarifying: "This is Garik's idea". --- 'Now it is hard to say
towards what kind of positions Garik has a leaning. Naturally, he likes to
play actively, continually calculating the most intricate combinative
variations. Together with this purely "age-related" leaning Kasparov has also
acquired a taste for positional play. However, this is not surprising, since
for a long time the Baku player has been studying at the Botvinnik school...
Of course, there are fears that the young player's head may be turned. But, as
far as I know, this 7th-year pupil of the 151st Baku school has so many
passions (music, theatre, books), that for this "illness" he simply does not
have time.' --- Yes, this was my most significant victory to date, one that
was especially pleasant after my not very successful debut abroad. Early in
April 1977 the name 'Kasparov' appeared for the first time in the Soviet
rating list: against it stood the number '2309', and in front of it was the
line 'Karpov 2709'. On 1st July these became '2320' and '2739' respectively.
Nikitin: 'From then on the alphabet firmly linked these two names, as if
formally registering their rivalry, which with interest and impatience was
anticipated in the chess world.'}) 0-1

[Event "?"]
[Site "?"]
[Date "????.??.??"]
[Round "?"]
[White "Turning Point"]
[Black "?"]
[Result "*"]
[Annotator "Garry Kasparov"]
[PlyCount "1"]
[EventDate "1984.??.??"]
[SourceDate "2009.12.06"]

{From 1977 FIDE began staging two official world junior championships: apart
from the usual one, up to the age of 20, there was also a cadet championship -
for players not older than 17. In connection with this the Soviet Chess
Federation organised a double-round qualifying tournament of the eight
strongest young players in the country (Leningrad, 7-25 April 1977). Anatoly
Bykhovsky: 'Seven of them had the master title or had already achieved the
master norm, and the only candidate master Kasparov was included as USSR
junior champion of the last two years. The 18-year-old Dolmatov and Kharitonov,
and the 19-year-old Zaid, Yermolinsky and Magerramov were fighting only for
the one place in the "up to 20" championship, whereas the 14-year-old Kasparov
and the 17-year-old Lanka and Yusupov were, in addition, contesting the one
place in the cadet championship.' --- It is amusing that initially they wanted
to arrange the qualification of each championship separately, so that the
young players would not 'get under the feet' of the older ones. And indeed we
endeavoured not to do this: the three youngest players, changing places in
turn, led throughout the tournament!} 1. -- {On this occasion I started badly:
as White I drew with Yusupov without any particular fight, and as Black I left
a piece en prise and lost from an excellent position to Kharitonov. In the 3rd
round I was opposed by my long-standing bKte noire Leonid Zaid, the 1974 USSR
junior champion and already a master for three years. In the tournament
situation only a win would satisfy me, and I was in a highly determined mood.}
*

[Event "18: Qualifying Tournament, Leningrad"]
[Site "?"]
[Date "1977.04.10"]
[Round "3"]
[White "Kasparov, G."]
[Black "Zaid, L."]
[Result "1-0"]
[ECO "B97"]
[Annotator "Garry Kasparov"]
[PlyCount "83"]
[EventDate "1977.??.??"]
[Source "Everyman Chess"]
[SourceDate "2012.11.28"]

1. e4 c5 2. Nf3 d6 3. d4 cxd4 4. Nxd4 Nf6 5. Nc3 a6 6. Bg5 (6. Be2 {- Game No.
11.}) 6... e6 7. f4 Qb6 {Zaid accepts the challenge! Since childhood I liked
this variation for its mind-boggling complexity, and I subsequently played it
many times as Black.} 8. Qd2 ({Not even contemplating the pragmatic} 8. Nb3 {
, as was played against me by Topalov (Novgorod 1997) and Leko (Linares 2001).
Now the value of every move is very high, and if White's attack should peter
out, without his 'base' b2-pawn he will be in trouble.}) 8... Qxb2 9. Nb3 {The
fashion of those years, following the Spassky-Fischer match (1972).} ({The
main line} 9. Rb1 {will be described in the next volume.}) 9... Qa3 10. Bxf6
gxf6 11. Be2 {One of the critical positions. It occurred later in some of my
'White' training games with Magerramov, and I gained a couple of good wins.
The experience gained unexpectedly came in useful in the 1990s when playing
Black against Short.} Nd7 {At that time this was a rare move (with the idea of
...Nc5 or ...b7-b5 and ...Bb7).} (11... Nc6 12. O-O Bd7 {suggests itself, with
the idea of} 13. -- (13. Bh5 $6 Bg7 {(Tal-Platonov, Dubna 1973)}) ({, or} 13.
f5 $6 Ne5 {(Tal-Portisch, Varese 1976; Game No.41 in Volume III of 'My Great
Predecessors')}) ({, while if} 13. Kh1 {possible is} Rc8 ({or} 13... h5))) ({
transposing into the variation} 11... h5 12. O-O Nc6 ({because of the
immediate knight retreat, and under the influence of my game with Zaid, after
11...h5 12 0-0 I preferred} 12... Nd7 $5 {(cf. the following note)}) 13. Kh1
Bd7 14. Nb1 {(Spassky-Fischer, 11th match game, Reykjavik 1972)} ({or} 14. Nd1
{(Short-Kasparov, 4th match game, London 1993) and at the same time avoiding
the dangerous 13 Nb1!.})) 12. O-O h5 13. Qd4 $2 {(36)} ({After encountering a
surprise, I thought for a long time and realised that now after} 13. Nb1 Qa4 {
the black queen would simply return home via c6, but nevertheless I was unable
to part with Spassky's tempting idea Nc3-b1.}) ({The typical} 13. Kh1 {is
better, although here too after} h4 $1 {Black feels quite secure:} 14. -- (14.
Bg4 h3 $5 15. Bxh3 Rxh3 16. gxh3 b5 {with excellent compensation for the
exchange}) (14. Rad1 h3 $1 15. g3 b5 16. Nb1 Qa4 {(Gashimov-Palac, Kusadasi
2006)}) ({, or} 14. h3 Be7 (14... b6 $5) 15. Rad1 {(Short-Kasparov, Riga 1995)}
Qb4 $5 {.})) 13... b5 14. Nb1 {(26) It is hard to devise anything better.} ({
Alas,} 14. Bxb5 $2 {is incorrect:} axb5 15. Nxb5 Qa4 16. Nc7+ Kd8 17. Nxa8 Qxa8
{.}) 14... Qa4 15. c4 {(2)} b4 16. f5 {(15) Trying to expose the king as soon
as possible and to tie down Black's forces by the need to defend the
weaknesses in his position.} Be7 ({The immediate} 16... Qc6 17. fxe6 fxe6 {
with the idea of} 18. N1d2 Qb6 $5 {was also not bad.}) 17. fxe6 {(4)} fxe6 18.
N1d2 Qc6 ({Zaid correctly does not hurry with} 18... Ne5 {, to avoid making it
easy for White to break through with c4-c5.}) ({But} 18... h4 $5 {also came
into consideration.}) 19. a3 $1 {(7) The start of play over the entire board.
Although from the opening I had not gained real compensation for the pawn, I
was inspired by the insecure position of the black king!} bxa3 20. Kh1 Rb8 21.
Rxa3 {(10)} Qb6 22. Qa1 $5 {It turns out that in the corner the queen can be
no less useful than in the centre.} Ne5 {It would appear that the powerful
outpost at e5, the two bishops and the extra pawn should sooner or later
secure a win for Black. But the weaknesses in his position give White chances
of confusing matters.} 23. c5 $5 {(12) Sacrificing a second pawn! From this
point a new phase of the game commences: White unexpectedly launches an attack,
and Black begins losing his strong points.} dxc5 24. Nc4 Qc7 (24... Nxc4 25.
Bxc4 Qd6 $1 {was far stronger, with the threat of ...h5-h4-h3 (} 26. Bxa6 $2 ({
while if} 26. Rd1 Qf4) 26... c4 $1 {is bad for White).}) 25. Nbd2 $1 {Just one
second-rate move by Zaid - and the position has suddenly become much sharper!
White has coordinated his forces: now his knight will go to c4, from e2 his
bishop is attacking the h5-pawn, and the rook at a3 will come into play along
the 3rd rank. For the moment Black's extra material is not felt, whereas the
problems with his king are obvious.} Nxc4 (25... h4 $5 {.}) 26. Nxc4 Rb4 $2 {
And this is already a serious error.} (26... h4 $1 {was essential, although
after} 27. h3 (27. e5 $6 {is dangerous in view of} h3 $1) 27... O-O $1 28. Raf3
$1 {with the idea of Qe1 White has sufficient counterplay against the weak
black pawns.}) 27. e5 $1 {(5) This breakthrough in the centre - the sacrifice
of a third pawn! - changes the position in White's favour.} (27. Rxf6 $2 Bxf6
28. Qxf6 {did not work because of the weakness of the back rank:} Rb1+ 29. Bf1
Rf8 {.}) 27... fxe5 ({Black also has major problems after} 27... f5 28. Nd6+
Kf8 29. Bxa6 {.}) 28. Qd1 $2 ({A virtually irresistible attack would have been
given by} 28. Nxe5 Rd4 $1 (28... h4 29. Bd3 $1) 29. Nf3 $1 Rf8 (29... e5 $6 30.
Nxd4 exd4 ({or} 30... cxd4 31. Rc1) 31. Bxa6) 30. Bxa6 {, and if} Bd7 {, then}
31. Be2 $3 {. --- But 28 Qd1, which loses White the greater part of his
advantage, very much appealed to me... --- Nikitin: 'Garry, who since
childhood loved beauty in chess, was tempted by the pretty geometry of the
manoeuvre Qd1-d4-a1-d1. It is amazing how mistakes are sometimes repeated. In
the decisive, 24th game of the match in Seville (1987), instead of a crude win
by 33 Qb5! Garry was again tempted by a similarly spectacular and completely
unexpected manoeuvre 33 Qd1??. Fortunately, in time-trouble Karpov did not
find the refutation, which would have secured him the chess crown'.}) 28... Bd7
29. Rxa6 h4 $2 {There was no longer time for this!} ({Only} 29... Rf8 $1 {
would have enabled Black to defend, although after} 30. Ra8+ Rb8 31. Rxf8+ (31.
Rxb8+ Qxb8 32. Bxh5+ Kd8 33. Bf7 Kc7 {is not so clear}) 31... Bxf8 32. Ra1 $1 {
White would have retained a dangerous initiative.}) 30. h3 {(5)} ({It is
natural that White should want to make an escape square for his king, but he
would also have won by} 30. Qd3 {(c2) with the threat of Nd6+ and Qg6+}) ({or
even} 30. Bh5+ Kd8 31. Na5 $1 {.}) 30... Rg8 {Allowing a powerful stroke.} ({
However, also} 30... Rf8 {would no longer have helped in view of} 31. Bh5+ Kd8
32. Rxf8+ Bxf8 33. Ra8+ Rb8 34. Qf1 {(f3)} Be7 35. Qf7 $1 {.}) ({Or} 30... e4
31. Ra8+ Rb8 32. Qa1 $1 Rh7 33. Ne5 {etc.}) 31. Rxe6 $1 {(4)} Kd8 ({Of course,
not} 31... Bxe6 $2 32. Bh5+ {.}) 32. Rxe5 {(2) While continuing his attack,
in passing White restores material equality.} Rxc4 ({It is hard to offer Black
any good advice:} 32... Rg6 33. Rf7 $1) ({or} 32... Rg7 33. Rh5 $1 {.}) 33. Qd5
$1 {A spectacular intermediate stroke - it is not often that one sees such an
attack by the queen on two rooks!} ({In time-trouble Zaid was counting on the
saving line} 33. Bxc4 $2 Qxe5 34. Bxg8 Bd6 {.}) ({But now Black is lost - as,
however, is also the case after} 33. Rxe7 $5 Rd4 34. Qb3 $1 Re8 (34... Rg3 $2
35. Rxd7+ $1) 35. Rxe8+ Bxe8 36. Qg8 Qg3 37. Qh8 $1 Qe3 38. Bb5 {.}) 33... Rxg2
$5 {(a desperate sacrifice; in other words, a 'psychic attack')} 34. Bxc4 {(2)}
({White would also have won with} 34. Kxg2 Rd4 35. Qa8+ $1 Qc8 ({or} 35... Bc8
36. Ba6 $1) 36. Qa5+ {. The move in the game is even better, although it also
looks more risky.}) 34... Rg3 35. Qa8+ ({Here I was also beginning to run
seriously short of time, and in my haste I missed some simpler ways to the
goal -} 35. Rd1 $5) ({or} 35. Rf7 $5 {.}) 35... Qc8 36. Qa5+ $1 ({Avoiding a
naïve trap -} 36. Qxc8+ $2 Kxc8 $1 37. Rxe7 $2 Bc6+ 38. Kh2 Rg2+ 39. Kh1 Rg7+
$1 40. Kh2 Rxe7 {, when it is White who has to fight for a draw.}) 36... Ke8 ({
(now} 36... Qc7 37. Qxc7+ Kxc7 38. Rxe7 {is hopeless for Black)}) 37. Bf7+ {(2)
} Kf8 38. Be6+ $6 ({It is a pity that I did not give the 'correct check' -} 38.
Bd5+ $1 Ke8 39. Rf7 Rxh3+ 40. Kg2 Rg3+ 41. Kf2 {, and Black can resign. Now,
however, there is precisely only one way for White to win.}) 38... Kg7 39. Qa1
$2 {Since after 38...Kg7 I did not like any of White's replies, I decided to
return my queen to the corner - to place it waiting in ambush. And although
objectively this move was bad, in practice it won the game for me, since it
threw my opponent into a panic: the threat of a discovered check by the rook
on e5 seems especially terrible in time-trouble.} ({The only decisive line was
} 39. Rf7+ Kg6 40. Qa2 $3 {- it is very hard to see this at the board, even
when the flag is not about to fall!} ({but not} 40. Rxe7 Bc6+ {.})) 39... Kh6
$2 ({Only a series of obligatory moves would have saved Black -} 39... Bc6+ $1
40. Rd5+ Kg6 $1 (40... Kh6 $2 41. Rf6+ $1) 41. Qb1+ Kh6 $1 {, and if} 42. Qc1+
{there is now a choice between} Rg5 ({and} 42... Bg5 {with a draw.})) 40. Qc1+
Bg5 ({Or} 40... Rg5 41. Rxg5 Bxg5 42. Rf6+ {.}) 41. Rxg5 Qc6+ 42. Bd5 {. 
Times: 2.34-2.30. --- An extremely tense encounter! Nikitin: 'After looking
through this fantastically pretty game, one can see what a great chess talent
was possessed not only by Garry, but also by his opponent. Leonid Zaid lived
initially in Kiev, and then in Lvov - cities with no less chess tradition than
Baku. In those years the remarkable trainer Viktor Kart was working actively
with young players in Lvov, and he fostered a whole group of grandmasters
headed by Beliavsky. But for some reason he did not "set eyes" on Zaid. I saw
how the youngster was unsuccessfully trying to make progress on his own. It
was a desperate struggle, and Leonid lost it. Not wishing to accept the
failure of his hopes, he moved to Israel and tried there to break into the
chess elite. But, alas, his time had passed...'} (42. Bd5 {. In the 4th round
I drew with Dolmatov, who was on 'plus one' thanks to a win over Yusupov. Then,
unfortunately, Sergey fell ill and withdrew from the tournament, and the
results of all his games were annulled. From the press: 'Had this not happened,
it is quite possible that the final arrangement of the places would have been
different.' But as it was, after the first half the leading group looked as
follows: Yusupov - 4½ out of 6; Kasparov, Lanka and Kharitonov - 3½. ---
The second half of the tournament saw some serious bloodshed. First Kharitonov
fell behind, after losing to Zaid and me. But Lanka, by contrast, burst ahead
by beating Magerramov and Yermolinsky. At the same time Yusupov suddenly came
to a halt, losing two games - to the same opponents Magerramov and Yermolinsky.
And, although I lost with Black to Zaid, in the 12th round I defeated Lanka -
and at last I was leading the race! But in the 13th, penultimate round Yusupov
beat Zaid and caught me. We each had 6½ out of 11, with Lanka on 6 and
Kharitonov on 5½. --- In the last round Yusupov played Black against
Kharitonov and gained a draw. Lanka had White against Zaid - and he lost his
third game in a row! I had White against Yermolinsky, who was in last place on
his own, and I arrived with the intention of 'giving mate' - but I also lost.
Alas, the Vilnius catastrophe of two years earlier (Game No.8) repeated itself.
Bykhovsky later said that I 'was badly prepared for the concluding game, both
in the psychological sense, and in the choice of specific opening variation' 
(cf. Game No.25, note to White's 15th move). I was able to get even with
Alexey only in the second half of the 1990s, when he was already a well-known
American grandmaster...} -- {The results of the qualifying tournament for the
junior world championships: 1. Yusupov - 7 out of 12; 2. Kasparov - 6½; 3-6.
Kharitonov, Lanka, Magerramov and Zaid - 6; 7. Yermolinsky - 4½ (Dolmatov
withdrew, having scored 2½ out of 4). Thus Yusupov won the right to play in
the 'up to 20' championship, and I in the 'not older than 17' championship.} (
42... -- {Nikitin: 'Although all of his opponents were at least three years
older than him, and all were masters of sport, Garry had no doubts that he
would succeed, and no words from me could shake his confidence. But there was
to be no new triumph. In such a tournament one could not expect a guaranteed
success, since battling against him were experienced lads, who were aware of
his strength and were able to exploit his childish impetuosity. Garik finished
just half a point behind the winner, his friend Artur Yusupov, and by the same
half point he also missed the master norm... For the first time I was with him
during an entire tournament and I saw how difficult it was to work with Garik
when he overestimated his possibilities. It was here that our serious problems,
connected with chess psychology, began.' --- Bykhovsky: 'The intensity of the
play was the cause of excessive anxiety and, as a consequence, bad mistakes,
the percentage of which exceeded the usual norm. This also explains the
uncertain play of the leaders towards the finish... Every appearance by Garik
Kasparov naturally creates particular interest, and his result in Leningrad
created big debates. Many, among them Kasparov himself, were not satisfied
with the competitive outcome. Others, and they include me, think that 2nd
place was a quite honourable result. But if one talks about the quality of
play, three months ago in Riga at the USSR Junior Championship, where Kasparov
scored 8½ out of 9, it looked better. Two days after the tournament,
Botvinnik, in whose chess school Kasparov studies, carefully looked though all
Garik's games with him. He praised him for his achievement, but at same time
he severely criticised him and gave his diagnosis: "There is a noticeable
desire to solve all problems by means of tactics alone, and an excessive
fascination with lengthy, ill-considered opening variations." Well, every
player, especially a 14-year-old, has the right to make mistakes. It is
important to learn from them and correct them as soon as possible.'}) (42... --
{Four months later, early in September 1977, I again travelled to France -
this time to the first official World Cadet Championship. On this occasion we
played in the picturesque resort of Cagnes-sur-Mer on the famous French
Riviera, which with its boulevards resembled summer-time Baku. The schedule
for this Swiss event was very demanding: a round in the evening, completion of
adjourned games the following morning, the next round in the evening, and so
on throughout the tournament, without a single free day. --- I was accompanied
by Anatoly Bykhovsky, state trainer of the USSR Sports Committee. Again the
sports authorities did not allow Nikitin to travel abroad with me, and he had
to limit himself to a number of written instructions for the tournament, for
example: 'Try and obtain points using your positional understanding and
endgame technique, which have become much better after a year of independent
work and study at sessions of the Botvinnik School. Play solidly, with a
minimum of risk. In play based "on understanding" most of your opponents will
create problems for themselves...'})) 1-0

[Event "19: World Cadet Ch., Cagnes-sur-Mer"]
[Site "?"]
[Date "1977.09.15"]
[Round "8"]
[White "Arnason, J."]
[Black "Kasparov, G."]
[Result "0-1"]
[ECO "B85"]
[Annotator "Garry Kasparov"]
[PlyCount "80"]
[EventDate "1977.??.??"]
[Source "Everyman Chess"]
[SourceDate "2012.11.28"]

{I made a good start - three wins, but the American Whitehead and the Pole
Weider began in similar fashion. In the 4th round I lost an undistinguished
game to an opponent who was by no means the strongest - Kappe from West
Germany, while Weider suffered such a heavy defeat against Whitehead that he
fell out of contention for the lead. I was able to recover quickly from my
loss and after a draw with Whitehead I won a further couple of games. ---
However, the lead was seized by the Icelandic player Jon Arnason, the adult
champion of his country and a future grandmaster - 6½ out of 7! In the 8th
round I faced a very difficult task: trailing Arnason by a point and playing
Black against him, I had to win without fail in order to retain chances of
victory in the tournament.} 1. e4 c5 2. Nf3 e6 3. d4 cxd4 4. Nxd4 Nf6 5. Nc3 d6
6. Be2 a6 (6... Nc6 7. Be3 {- Game No.3.}) 7. a4 Nc6 {(2)} 8. Be3 Be7 9. O-O
O-O 10. f4 Qc7 (10... Bd7 11. Nb3 $1 {.}) 11. Kh1 ({Another tabiya of the
classical Scheveningen is the line} 11. Qe1 Nxd4 12. Bxd4 e5 {(Game Nos.59, 60
in 'Revolution in the 70s').}) 11... Rd8 {(5) At that time I liked this move
with the idea of 12 Bf3 Ne5!, and the e8-square may come in useful for the
knight.} ({But later I exclusively played} 11... Re8 {and I developed this
set-up in detail in my first two matches with Karpov (cf. 'Kasparov vs. Karpov
1975-1985').}) 12. Qe1 Nxd4 13. Bxd4 e5 14. fxe5 (14. Be3 exf4 15. Bxf4 Be6 16.
Qg3 Nd7 17. Bd3 Ne5 {is also harmless (Karpov-Ribli, Leningrad 1977).}) ({But
that same year Geller demonstrated a more unpleasant plan for White -} 14. Bg1
$1 exf4 15. a5 $1 {(Game No.61 in 'Revolution in the 70s').}) 14... dxe5 15.
Be3 Be6 {(2)} 16. Qg3 Qa5 {(21) Avoiding the bind with a4-a5, although there
was nothing terrible about that;} ({and} 16... Rd7) ({or} 16... Kh8 {would
have been quite alright. Black's position is not bad, although it should not
be overestimated.}) 17. Rad1 $6 {Unusual passivity for this opponent -
apparently, the burden of leading affected him.} (17. Bg5 Kh8 18. -- (18. Qh4
$1 {, was far more energetic, with the threat of Rxf6, which is by no means
decisive, but promises White the initiative - say,} Rg8 19. Bd3 Qb4 20. Nd5
Nxd5 21. exd5 Qxh4 22. Bxh4 Bxh4 23. dxe6 {with a favourable ending.}) ({. In
the final, 11th round Santo Roman played the weaker} 18. Bd3 {against me, but
I too replied not very successfully -} Rd7 (18... Qb4 $5) ({or} 18... Rd4 $5 {
was stronger}) {, and after} 19. Nd5 $1 Bxd5 20. exd5 Rxd5 21. Bxf6 Bxf6 22.
Qh3 (22. Qf3 $5) 22... e4 23. Bxe4 Rh5 24. Qf3 {White gained a draw without
any trouble. A pity: if I had won this game I would have finished 2nd... ---
Arnason plays more simply, thinking only about a draw. 'But the Sicilian
Defence is an insidious opening, and not without reason is it said: White
either gives mate, or loses in the endgame. And here, on encountering the
opponent's obvious intention to "stifle" the play, Garry does not become
nervous and does not endeavour to sharpen the game "at any price", but looks
for ways to accumulate small gains, not fearing the transition into an endgame.
' (Nikitin)})) 17... Rxd1 {(12)} 18. Rxd1 Rd8 19. Rxd8+ Bxd8 {The exchanges
have clearly been to Black's advantage: there are many weaknesses in White's
position - the e4-pawn and his entire queenside.} 20. Bh6 g6 {(8) A useful
move. Without the rooks White has no chances of an attack, whereas Black will
soon activate his dark-square bishop, and when his queen goes to b4 White's
position will come under pressure.} 21. h3 Bb6 $1 {(4)} 22. Be3 Bd4 {(7) Both
defending the e5-pawn, and pressing on the knight. As often happens in the
Sicilian, White has ended up in a difficult position without making any bad
mistake.} 23. Qf2 Bxe3 {(3)} 24. Qxe3 Qb4 25. b3 Qd4 $1 {(2) An unpleasant
surprise for Arnason: Black himself initiates the exchange of queens! 'Wisdom,
unusual for a 14-year-old. White unexpectedly finds himself in zugzwang. I
flatter myself with the hope that during the game Garik remembered my
instructions.' (Nikitin)} 26. Qd3 Kg7 $1 27. Bf1 ({Also after} 27. Kh2 h5 28.
Bf1 Qf2 $1 {White would have had problems finding useful moves.}) 27... Nh5 $1
{(2) An active sortie with a tactical point.} ({Also interesting was} 27...
Nd7 $5 28. Qxd4 exd4 29. Nb1 Nc5 30. Nd2 f5 31. e5 Kf7 {with the better
endgame:} 32. Nf3 d3 33. Bxd3 Bxb3 $1 {.}) 28. Qf3 $2 {Arnason gives in to the
'queen war' and he allows a decisive invasion.} (28. Qxd4 $2 {was bad because
of the interposition} Ng3+ $1 {, leading after} 29. Kg1 exd4 30. Ne2 Nxe2+ 31.
Bxe2 Kf6 32. Kf2 Ke5 {and ...Bd7-c6 to a won bishop ending.}) (28. g4 $6 {was
also insufficient:} Nf4 29. Qxd4 exd4 30. Nd1 (30. Ne2 Nxe2 $1 31. Bxe2 Kf6 {
and wins}) 30... d3 $5 ({or} 30... h5 $5 31. Nf2 (31. gxh5 f5 $1) 31... Kf6 {
etc.})) (28. Kh2 {was comparatively more resilient, after which Black in turn
could avoid the queen exchange -} Qf2 $1 29. Nd1 Qf4+ 30. Kg1 Ng3 31. Nf2 h5 {
with powerful pressure.}) 28... Qd2 $1 {(2)} 29. Qd3 {(not seeing any other
way of defending the c2-pawn)} Qf2 $1 {(2)} 30. Kh2 (30. Be2 Bxh3 $1 {.}) 30...
Nf4 31. Qf3 Qxc2 {(2)} (31... Nxh3 32. Qxf2 Nxf2 {would also have won, but it
is simpler to retain the active queen.}) 32. Nd5 Bxd5 {(2) A minor blemish.} (
{The immediate} 32... Qd2 $1 {was more forceful, and if} 33. Nxf4 Qxf4+ $1 {.})
33. exd5 Qd2 34. Bc4 {It would appear that Arnason's will to resist was
already broken.} ({White's last chance was} 34. d6 $1 Qxd6 35. Qxb7 {,
although after} Nd3 $1 36. g3 (36. Bxd3 e4+) 36... a5 {Black has a technically
won position.}) 34... f5 $1 35. Qg3 h6 $1 {(2) By depriving the queen of the
g5-square, Black puts his opponent in zugzwang.} 36. d6 Qxd6 {The rest is
agony.} 37. Qc3 Nh5 38. Be2 Nf6 39. Qc8 e4+ 40. Kh1 Qe7 {(2) After rattling
off the moves to the time control, White resigned. --- Times: 2.29-1.33.} (
40... -- {After this important win there was now a trio of leaders: Kasparov,
Arnason and Whitehead on 6½ out of 8. Bykhovsky: 'It appeared that Garry was
now in a good position for a finishing burst, but in fact he had run out of
steam. In the last three games his play was much weaker; he made frequent
oversights and managed only three draws. Success went to the 16-year-old - an
older and physically stronger player.'}) (40... -- {Results of the 1977 World
Cadet Championship: 1. Arnason - 9 out of 11; 2. Whitehead - 8½; 3. Kasparov
- 8, followed by the likes of Morovic, McNab and the 12-year-old Short, who
also weakened at the finish (altogether - 30 participants). It is a curious
fact worth noting that Arnason actually became the first Icelandic world
champion not only in chess, but also in the entire history of sport in that
country!}) (40... -- {Why, as the tournament favourite, did I obviously not
play up to my potential? Apparently, as in Wattignies the year before, what
told was the tiring schedule and the unaccustomed surroundings - alongside
there was no one close to me, and I was quite unable to concentrate fully on
my play. Three years later, after winning the world under-20 championship in
Dortmund, I commented in an interview: 'In those cadet competitions perhaps
objectively I was somewhat stronger than my opponents, but I had an incorrect
impression of tournament strategy as a whole. However, now I have behind me
the experience of some strong adult tournaments. I have more strength for the
finish, and I have become more stable psychologically.' --- This comparative
failure was especially distressing when compared with the triumph of my friend
and rival Artur Yusupov, who in those same autumn days became world under-20
champion. The many years of rivalry between me and Mark Dvoretsky's pupils -
Yusupov and Dolmatov - continued to the end of the 1982 Interzonal Tournaments,
although in the 1981 USSR Championship it was already evident that I had moved
ahead.}) (40... -- {Incidentally, in the mid-1970s Dvoretsky assisted
Botvinnik with the lessons in his school, and he also made a valuable
contribution to my chess development. Nikitin: 'While being a player of
grandmaster standard, Dvoretsky found his true calling in research and
training - he developed innovative methods for the teaching of chess strategy
and the endgame, and he created a card index of test positions, now known to
all professionals. The juniors who came to the sessions of the school had to
solve these problems. Garry always tried to get to the essence of the position,
and this essence was engraved in his memory, gradually improving his technique.
For his endgame knowledge Garik is greatly indebted to Dvoretsky. Alas, the
growth of his assistant's independence did not greatly please Botvinnik, and
early in 1978 they parted. Together with Dvoretsky, Yusupov and Dolmatov also
left the school...' --- After the return from Cagnes-sur-Mer I had a lingering
feeling of dissatisfaction. It was a critical moment, perhaps one of the
turning points in my life. --- Trips to tournaments and chess training
sessions took up much of my time, and left increasingly less for contact with
my contemporaries. This was my fate - an early contact with people older than
me: adult men who as though replaced my lost father, introducing into my
upbringing a male basis and thereby balancing the strong influence of maternal
love. But even so, I led a rather unnatural life for my age, and already then
I sensed that I was being partly deprived of my childhood. Occupied with
mysterious events and adult problems, for my contemporaries I was as though
from another planet. And at times I had a terrible desire to become a normal
boy, like all the others... Soon I would be 15 years old, and I thought that
if in the near future I did not gain the master title, it would be time to
think about another profession. How long could I go on being considered
promising; wasn't it time to achieve 'adult' results?}) (40... -- {Russian
honoured trainer Boris Postovsky recalls: 'In October 1977 the USSR
Championship First League was held in Baku, and I was seconding grandmasters
Yuri Razuvaev and Boris Gulko, who, incidentally, qualified for the Premier
League and two months later became USSR champion. Several times young Garik
Kasparov looked in at my room - to discuss chess topics, and at the same time
pass on presents from his mother (an exotic jam made from feijoa berries was
especially tasty). Watching Garik pouring out variations, Razuvaev was unable
to conceal his admiration, but on one occasion Gulko sadly lamented: "There it
is, our ruin in the not too distant future..." These were prophetic words! But
it is amusing that, against Razuvaev and Gulko, Kasparov has been left with a
negative score.'}) 0-1

[Event "20: Training Game, Baku"]
[Site "?"]
[Date "1977.12.10"]
[Round "?"]
[White "Magerramov, E."]
[Black "Kasparov, G."]
[Result "0-1"]
[ECO "D58"]
[Annotator "Garry Kasparov"]
[PlyCount "60"]
[EventDate "1977.??.??"]
[Source "Everyman Chess"]
[SourceDate "2012.11.28"]

{In November my trainers began an intensive search for a tournament where I
could again try to achieve the master norm. It would have been most convenient
to do this on my home ground, but for the moment nothing appropriate in Baku
was anticipated. Nikitin: 'The next such tournament was due to begin the
following January in Minsk, but there the young Baku player was certainly not
expected - they had enough of their own competitors. And here Botvinnik came
to our aid, by writing to the Belorussian Chess Federation. They could not
refuse him, and early in December the desired invitation was received. We
began preparing for the trip to Minsk.' --- Right to the end of the year I
worked intensively, studying new opening set-ups and playing training games. I
especially remember one of these, with my old friend and rival Elmar
Magerramov, played in the republic chess club. --- It should be said that at
that time I often followed the opening ideas and discoveries made jointly with
Elmar. We both played the Scheveningen, instilled in us by Privorotsky, but
Elmar also employed the Najdorf Variation with 7...Qb6 - later I also included
it in my repertoire. Under the influence of my old friend I also began playing
both the flexible 'Hedgehog' set-up, and the sharp Modern Benoni... But that
day, for virtually the second time in my life, in a serious game I decided to
go in for a Queen's Gambit.} 1. Nf3 Nf6 2. d4 e6 3. c4 d5 4. Nc3 Be7 5. Bg5 O-O
6. e3 h6 7. Bh4 b6 {The only reason I chose the
Tartakower-Makogonov-Bondarevsky Variation was that I had prepared an
interesting novelty in a line employed by Elmar. But later, before my matches
with Korchnoi (1983) and Karpov (1984/85), I made a genuinely deep study of it,
paying particular attention to a number of model games by Spassky and Geller 
(cf. Volume III of 'My Great Predecessors', pp.321-327).} 8. Qb3 {
Polugayevsky's favourite plan.} ({In the 1980s I also tried} 8. Qc2 {(Game No.
41)}) ({or, most often,} 8. Be2 {.}) 8... Bb7 9. Bxf6 Bxf6 10. cxd5 exd5 11.
Rd1 c5 $5 {Here is my invention - a pawn sacrifice! It is hard to imagine a
more audacious and paradoxical move: after all, White has done everything in
his powers to prevent ...c7-c5.} ({Later a related variation became more
popular:} 11... Re8 12. Bd3 c5 $5 13. dxc5 Nd7 $1 14. c6 (14. cxb6 $6 Nc5 $1 {
and ...Nxd3+}) 14... Bxc6 15. O-O Nc5 {(Gulko-Radashkovich, Rostov-on-Don 1971;
Kasparov-Beliavsky, 46th USSR Championship, Tbilisi 1978). Things even reached
the stage that White began anticipating ...c7-c5 with 12 a3 (Korchnoi-Kasparov,
10th match game, London 1983; Kramnik-Kasparov, 3rd match game, Moscow 2001).})
12. dxc5 Nd7 $1 13. c6 $5 {A pragmatic reply.} ({Of course, in the first
instance I considered the variations with} 13. cxb6 Nc5 14. Qc2 (14. Qb4 $6 Qd6
$1) 14... -- ({, and I was intending to play the crazy gambit} 14... d4 $6 15.
Nxd4 $1 Qxb6 {'with pressure for the two pawns'. However, Makogonov (in
contrast to Stohl) disapproved of this idea, and he was probably right: by
returning one of the pawns -} 16. Be2 Bxg2 17. Rg1 Bb7 18. Nf5 Kh8 19. Rd6 $1
Qc7 (19... Qa5 $2 20. Rxf6 $1 gxf6 21. Nd6) 20. Nd5 Bxd5 21. Rxd5 {, White
retains prospects of an attack - for example, if} Qxh2 $6 22. Rf1 Ne6 {, then}
23. Nxh6 $1 {.}) ({. In Stohl's opinion,} 14... Qxb6 {(?!)} 15. Nxd5 Bxd5 16.
Rxd5 Rac8 17. Bc4 {is insufficient for Black}) ({, as is} 14... axb6 {(!)} 15.
Be2 ({after} 15. Nd4 Bxd4 $1 16. exd4 Ne4 {White is also unable to retain his
material advantage}) 15... Bxc3+ $1 {( but in fact this is good for him)} 16.
bxc3 (16. Qxc3 Rxa2 {with equality}) 16... Qc7 17. O-O Ne4 {, regaining the
pawn.})) 13... Bxc6 14. Nd4 $6 {Again erring on the cautious side.} (14. Be2
Nc5 {was also inappropriate}) ({but} 14. Nxd5 $5 {was stronger and more
critical:} Nc5 15. Nxf6+ Qxf6 16. Qc3 $1 Qxc3+ 17. bxc3 {, reaching a
perfectly safe endgame with an extra pawn, although after} Bxf3 18. gxf3 Na4 {
(Stohl) Black has sufficient counterplay.}) 14... Bxd4 $1 {In the 4th game of
my second match with Karpov (1985) in a similar position I wrongly avoided
this non-routine exchange, but here its advantages are far more specific and
obvious.} 15. Rxd4 $6 ({A difficult choice: in the event of} 15. exd4 Qg5 $1
16. g3 Rfe8+ (16... Qf5 $5) 17. Be2 Qg4 {(h5) Black also has a dangerous
initiative, although here it is more difficult for his c6-bishop to display
its strength. Elmar was hoping somehow to defend, but he unexpectedly
encountered a unique series of moves, consisting of eleven successive attacks!}
) 15... Nc5 $1 16. Qd1 Ne6 $1 17. Rd2 d4 $1 {(the weak isolated d-pawn has
suddenly been transformed into a formidable battering-ram)} 18. exd4 $6 ({The
'ugly'} 18. Ne2 $1 {was more resilient, when} Qd5 {(Stohl) is good,} ({or else
} 18... Qe7 $5 19. Nxd4 Nxd4 20. Rxd4 Rad8 {with an attack.})) 18... Re8 {An
ambush!} ({However,} 18... Nf4 {came into consideration:} 19. d5 $1 Qe7+ $5 20.
Be2 Nxg2+ 21. Kf1 Bd7 22. Rg1 (22. Kxg2 $2 Qg5+ 23. Kf1 Bh3+ 24. Ke1 Qg2 25.
Rf1 Rae8 {and wins}) 22... Nf4 {, and White does not have the resource} 23. Bg4
f5 24. Rd4 $2 {because of} fxg4 {(the rook comes in useful on the f8-square!).}
) 19. f3 $2 {A decisive mistake;} ({as was} 19. Qg4 $2 h5 $1 20. Qg3 h4 21. Qg4
f5 {.}) ({It was essential to} 19. d5 $1 Nf4+ 20. Be2 Nxg2+ 21. Kf1 Bd7 $1 22.
Rg1 $1 ({but not Stohl's 'cooperative' variation} 22. Kxg2 $2 Qg5+ 23. Kf1 Bh3+
24. Ke1 Qg2) 22... Nf4 {( and although this position is unpleasant for White,
at least he is not losing by force)} (22... Nh4 {is also not bad}) 23. Bg4 $1
f5 24. Rd4 $1 fxg4 25. Rxf4 Qh4 26. Kg2 Re5 27. Kh1 {, still somehow holding
on.}) 19... Bxf3 $3 {To be honest, I did not even especially calculate the
variations, since I had no doubts about the correctness of the piece sacrifice.
} 20. gxf3 (20. Qxf3 Ng5+ {.}) 20... Qh4+ 21. Rf2 Nxd4+ ({The alternative was} 
21... Nf4+ $5 22. Ne4 ({or} 22. Be2 Ng2+) 22... f5 23. Bc4+ Kh8 24. O-O fxe4 {
etc.}) 22. Be2 (22. Ne4 Rxe4+ $1 {.}) 22... Nxf3+ 23. Kf1 Qh3+ 24. Rg2 Nh4 ({
First} 24... Rad8 $1 {was more accurate, for example:} 25. Bxf3 ({or} 25. Nd5
Nh4) 25... Rxd1+ 26. Bxd1 f5 27. Rhg1 g5 {and wins.}) 25. Rhg1 Rad8 26. Qe1 (
26. Qa4 $1 {(with the idea of Qg4) would have prolonged the resistance.} -- ({
. After this there could have followed} 26... Nxg2 27. Rxg2 Qe3 {(Stohl)}) ({
, or the more energetic} 26... Nf5 $5 {(Nikitin)} 27. Ke1 $1 (27. Qf4 Rd4 $1 {
and ...Ne3+}) 27... Qe3 28. Qc2 {- in Stohl's opinion 'the defences still
hold', but in my view after} Re5 $1 {Black has an irresistible attack.})) 26...
Rd3 $1 {Now it all ends very quickly.} 27. Qf2 (27. Nd1 Nf3 {.}) 27... Nf3 $1 {
I remembered this picturesque position for a long time: rarely do you see such
a large number of stalemated pieces!} 28. Rh1 ({It would have been suicidal to
play} 28. Nd5 {(b5)} Rd1+ $3 29. Bxd1 Nxh2# {!}) ({or} 28. Qg3 Nd2+ $1 29. Ke1
Rxg3 30. Rxg3 Nf3+ 31. Kf2 Nxg1 32. Rxh3 Nxh3+ {etc.}) 28... Rde3 29. Rhg1 Kh8
({Of course, the computer demands the simple} 29... Rxc3 $1 {, since if} 30.
bxc3 {there follows} Nxh2+ ({but I had already seen} 30... b5) 31. Ke1 Qxc3+ {
and mate in 12 moves.}) 30. Rh1 b5 $1 ({And in view of} 30... b5 31. a3 a5 {
with the unavoidable ...b5-b4 White resigned. --- Times: 1.50-0.40.}) (30... --
{This crushing win over a master played an important psychological role,
regaining me my former confidence, and I now travelled to Minsk full of hope.
--- This game summed up the year 1977, concluding the first, learning stage of
my chess career - my 'Baku universities'. No one, myself included, guessed
that I was on the threshold of a qualitative leap in my chess development.})
0-1

[Event "?"]
[Site "?"]
[Date "????.??.??"]
[Round "?"]
[White "2.1: Adult Games: 1978-1980"]
[Black "?"]
[Result "*"]
[Annotator "Garry Kasparov"]
[PlyCount "1"]
[EventDate "1984.??.??"]
[SourceDate "2009.12.07"]

{Master Class: Sokolsky Memorial Tournament (Minsk, 08.01-02.02.1978): 1.
Kasparov - 13 out of 17; 2. Kupreichik - 12½; 3. Shereshevsky - 11; 4-6.
Kapengut, Klovans and Mochalov - 10½; 7-8. Dydyshko and Lutikov - 9½; 9.
Yuferov - 9; 10-11. Roizman and Zakharov - 8½; 12-13. Begun and Smirnov - 8;
14-15. Mariasin and Litvinov - 7; 16. Kagan - 4; 17. Veremeichik - 3½; 18.
Lyuboshits - 2½.} 1. -- {This tournament in memory of the well-known master,
teacher and theoretician Alexey Sokolsky (1908-1969) was the main chess event
of the year in Belorussia. From outside only distinguished masters were
invited, but for me an exception was made - not so much because I was
two-times USSR junior champion, but out of respect for Botvinnik. --- Early in
January 1978 I flew in with my mother to frosty, snowy Minsk (Shakarov and
then Nikitin arrived later). Here everything was unusual: the severe winter,
the cold hotel on the outskirts of the city, and the freezing tram in which
the players travelled to the playing venue - the republic chess club. After
settling in, we set off to look for a canteen: it was time for dinner. However,
no sooner had I made one uncertain step on the pavement, when I fell into a
deep hole, covered by a thick layer of snow. I was able to get out only with
my mother's help. I was completely soaked, and I had to rush back to the hotel
to change. My mother was seriously alarmed, but later she laughed: 'It's
better to take a tumble before the start, than in the tournament itself!'} (1.
-- {During the drawing of lots I looked round with a certain trepidation at my
formidable opponents: Anatoly Lutikov (a grandmaster!), several times a
finalist in the championship of the country, Albert Kapengut (an outstanding
theoretician and trainer), Viktor Kupreichik, Yanis Klovans and Alexander
Zakharov, and, apart from them, a dozen solid masters, practically the entire
cream of Belorussian chess. I remember saying to my mother: 'How difficult it
will be to score this "plus two"...' (that was the master norm - 9½ out of
17). Our small 'team' was also looked at with interest: what surprises will be
caused by this audacious youth from distant Baku? Nikitin: 'All were expecting
something exotic, but that which happened was not anticipated by anyone'. ---
I prepared well, especially with regard to the openings: I already had my own
preparations in the most seemingly well-studied positions, assessed by theory
as equal. As a result I was able to create sharp, unusual situations, which
were to my taste. Strictly speaking, it was only here that my battle at the
board began. --- In the first round I was paired with Black against the 1977
Armed Forces champion Sergey Yuferov, who was famed as an opening theoretician
and who successfully played the King's Indian Defence with both colours. This
was the favourite opening of my youth, which served me faithfully for almost
my entire career. And I decided to throw down a challenge to the experienced
master! This game opened a new page in my competitive biography - it signified
my entry into the world of adult chess.}) *

[Event "21: Sokolsky Memorial, Minsk"]
[Site "?"]
[Date "1978.01.08"]
[Round "1"]
[White "Yuferov, S."]
[Black "Kasparov, G."]
[Result "0-1"]
[ECO "E99"]
[Annotator "Garry Kasparov"]
[PlyCount "120"]
[EventDate "1978.??.??"]
[Source "Everyman Chess"]
[SourceDate "2012.11.28"]

1. d4 Nf6 2. c4 g6 3. Nc3 Bg7 4. e4 d6 5. Be2 O-O 6. Nf3 e5 7. O-O Nc6 8. d5
Ne7 {One of the King's Indian tabiyas.} 9. Ne1 {This continuation was popular
in those times;} ({but in the late-1980s} 9. Nd2 {came to the fore}) ({and in
the mid-1990s -} 9. b4 {.}) 9... Nd7 {Impeding the typical c4-c5 breakthrough.}
(9... Ne8 {is also acceptable, as I played against Shirov (Olympiad, Manila
1992) and Korchnoi (Debrecen 1992).}) 10. Nd3 {The main line.} ({Later,
largely through the efforts of Korchnoi, the old plan with} 10. Be3 f5 11. f3 {
was rehabilitated (Game No.39 in Volume V of 'My Great Predecessors').}) 10...
f5 11. Bd2 (11. exf5 {has long been out of fashion - Game No.64 in Volume IV
of 'My Great Predecessors'.}) 11... Nf6 (11... f4 $2 12. Bg4 $1 {.}) 12. f3 f4
{At that time everyone made this direct move with the idea of a pawn storm on
the kingside.} ({Later many began to prefer Geller's more flexible plan with} 
12... Kh8 {(or 11...Kh8), for example:} 13. Rc1 c5 14. g4 a6 $5 15. Nf2 h6 {
with the idea of ...Neg8, ...Nh7 and ...Bf6 (Gelfand-Kasparov, Linares 1990).})
13. c5 ({White must act energetically! The classic game Najdorf-Gligoric (Mar
del Plata 1953) went} 13. b4 $6 g5 14. c5 h5 15. Nf2 Ng6 $1 16. Rc1 Rf7 17.
cxd6 cxd6 18. a4 Bf8 $1 {(defending the 'base' pawn on d6)} 19. a5 Rg7 20. h3
Nh8 $5 {(the knight goes by a roundabout way to h6, to support the ...g5-g4
breakthrough)} 21. Nb5 (21. Be1 $5) 21... g4 $1 22. fxg4 hxg4 23. hxg4 a6 24.
Na3 Bd7 $1 25. Nc4 Rc8 26. Nb6 Rxc1 27. Bxc1 Be8 28. Ba3 Nf7 29. Qc2 Nh6 {,
and in the end Black won with a direct attack on the king.}) 13... g5 {This
position is topical even today: using the 'Gligoric method' can Black succeed
in creating sufficient counterplay to neutralise the opponent's offensive on
the queenside?} 14. cxd6 ({Now} 14. Rc1 Ng6 15. Nb5 {is again fashionable,
delaying the exchange on d6 and in some cases sacrificing a piece:} -- (15...
a6 16. cxd6 $1 (16. Na3 $6 g4 $1 {Pachman-Padevsky, Dresden 1956}) 16... axb5
17. dxc7 {(Shariyazdanov-Klimov, St. Petersburg 1997)}) ({, or} 15... Rf7 16.
Ba5 $1 {(the point of White's idea is to provoke weaknesses)} b6 17. cxb6 (17.
cxd6 {is also possible, since} bxa5 $2 18. dxc7 {is bad for Black}) 17... cxb6
(17... axb6 18. Be1 $1 {Najdorf-Uhlmann, Moscow 1956}) 18. Be1 a6 19. Nc3 h5 ({
but the modern} 19... a5 $1 {is not so clear}) 20. Nb4 {- in this way Yuferov
defeated Dydyshko (Minsk 1978).})) 14... cxd6 {To the surprise of the
spectators, all these and the next eight moves were made quite quickly by us.}
15. Nf2 {Yuferov demonstrates a new plan, which had been successfully employed
by Sosonko against Kavalek (Wijk aan Zee 1977). We had both seen this game: it
was published in 'Informator' Volume 23. White wants to play Qc2 and Rfc1, in
order to intensify his onslaught on the queenside, and to defend his kingside
with minimal forces - by holding the g4-point. The master was apparently
hoping that his young opponent would not cope with the difficult problems, but
I had prepared, as it seemed to me, a lethal novelty!} ({The usual
continuation is} 15. Rc1 Ng6 16. Nb5 Rf7 17. Qc2 -- ({, and since} 17... g4 $6
18. Nc7 gxf3 19. gxf3 Bh3 {(Larsen-Tal, 5th match game, Eersel 1969) is
dubious because of} 20. Ne6 $1) ({, the black knight is forced to retreat -} 
17... Ne8 {. After} 18. a4 h5 19. Nf2 Bf8 20. h3 Rg7 {the following
continuations are all unclear:} 21. Nxa7 {(Averkin-Kasparov, Moscow 1979),} (
21. a5 {(Polugayevsky-Tal, 7th match game, Alma-Ata 1980)}) ({and} 21. Qb3 Nh4
22. Rc2 {(Ivanchuk-Timman, 4th match game, Hilversum 1991; Ivanchuk-Cheparinov,
Sofia 2008). At any event, I always happily went in for these complicated
positions with Black.}))) 15... Ng6 16. a4 (16. Qc2 Rf7 (16... h5 17. Nb5) 17.
Rfc1 {is an attempt to refine the move order} -- ({, hoping to gain an
advantage after} 17... Ne8 18. a4 h5 19. Ncd1 Bf8 20. Ra3 $1 a6 21. Qc3 Bd7 22.
Qa5 $1 b6 23. Qb4 Rg7 24. Rac3 Nh4 25. h3 Be7 26. Be1 {(Aronian-Nakamura,
Bursa 2010)}) ({, but} 17... a6 18. a4 h5 19. h3 g4 $1 (19... Nh4 $6 20. a5 $1)
20. fxg4 hxg4 21. hxg4 Bh6 22. a5 Bg5 23. Na4 Bh4 {gives chances for both
sides (my old analysis!).})) 16... Rf7 17. Nb5 h5 18. h3 Bf8 {Almost
completing the 'Gligoric-style' regrouping. Each side carries out his own plan,
and White, while preparing a queenside invasion, must be extremely attentive
to the opponent's threats on the kingside.} 19. Qc2 a6 {(2) The first step to
the side!} ({In the afore-mentioned Sosonko-Kavalek game Black immediately
rushed into the attack -} 19... g4 20. fxg4 hxg4 21. hxg4 a6 22. Na3 Rg7 23.
Rfc1 ({after Ligterink's recommendation} 23. Nc4 {there follows} Nh4 {- cf.
the note to White's 21st move}) 23... Nh4 24. Qd1 Bxg4 $6 ({the unclear} 24...
Bd7) ({or} 24... Nh5 $5 {was better}) 25. Nxg4 $1 ({not} 25. Bxg4 $2 Nxg4 26.
Nxg4 Nxg2 $1 27. Kxg2 Qh4 28. Kf1 ({or} 28. Qh1 Rxg4+ 29. Kf3 Rg3+ 30. Ke2 Qg4+
31. Kf2 Be7 $1 {and wins}) 28... Rxg4 29. Ke2 Rg3 $1) 25... -- (25... Nxg4 $2
26. Bxg4 Qg5 (26... Nxg2 27. Kf1 $1 {was more resilient}) 27. Be6+ Kh8 28. g4
$1 {he lost.}) (25... Nxg2 {is stronger (with the idea of 26 Kxg2? Nxg4 and ...Qh4), as had occurred in the game Carbrera-Browne (Las Palmas 1977), which
Yuferov and I did not know. There after} 26. Rc3 $6 ({but here too the
cool-headed} 26. Kf1 $1 {(Stohl) would have set Black difficult problems:} Nh4
27. Be1 Nxe4 28. Qd3 Nc5 29. Rxc5 $1 {etc}) 26... Nxg4 (26... Nh4 $5) 27. Bxg4
Ne3 28. Bxe3 Qh4 {sharp, roughly equal play developed.})) 20. Na3 Rg7 21. Rfc1
$2 {A by no means obvious but serious mistake.} (21. Nc4 {was correct, for
example:} -- (21... Nh4 22. Qd1 ({Crouch's recommendation} 22. Ba5 Qe8 23. Qd1
{leads to variation 'b1' after} g4 $1 24. fxg4 hxg4 25. hxg4 Qg6) 22... g4 $1 (
{Crouch's idea} 22... Rb8 23. a5 g4 24. fxg4 hxg4 25. hxg4 Nxg4 26. Nxg4 Qg5 {
runs into} 27. Nce3 $1 Qg6 ({or} 27... Be7 28. Rf2 $1 Qg6 29. Rc1 fxe3 30. Nxe3
{with an obvious advantage for White}) 28. Be1 $1 fxe3 29. Nf6+ Kh8 30. g4 $1)
23. fxg4 (23. Ba5 $6 Nxf3+ $1 {- Crouch}) 23... hxg4 24. hxg4 Nxg4 $1 {
transposing into variation 'b2';} ({Crouch gives only} 24... Rb8 25. Ra3 $1 {.}
)) (21... g4 {, and White faces a choice - whether or not to include Ba5, but
in both cases Black has sufficient counterplay:} 22. -- (22. Ba5 Qe8 23. fxg4
hxg4 24. hxg4 Nh4 25. Qd1 Qg6 (25... Nxg4 $5) 26. Nb6 Bxg4 27. Nxg4 (27. Bxg4
Re8) 27... Nxg2 $1 (27... Nxg4 $6 {is weaker:} 28. Bxg4 Re8 29. Bf3 $1 Nxg2 30.
Kf2 {, Chovanec-Lührig, correspondence 2000}) 28. Kxg2 Qxe4+ 29. Kg1 Nxg4 30.
Bxg4 f3 31. Kf2 Qxg4 ({or} 31... Be7 {with equality})) (22. fxg4 hxg4 23. hxg4
Nh4 24. Qd1 Nxg4 $1 25. Nxg4 Qg5 26. Nce3 $1 Be7 $1 27. Rf2 (27. Qc2 Nxg2)
27... Qg6 28. Rc1 fxe3 29. Nxe3 Bd7 $1 30. Rc7 (30. Rc4 Rf8) 30... Bg5 31. Ng4
Bxg4 32. Rxg7+ Kxg7 33. Bxg5 Bxe2 34. Qb3 (34. Qc1 Bf3 $1 {- this is not
possible with the rook on b8}) 34... Qxg5 $1 35. Qxb7+ Kh6 36. Qxa8 Qe3 $1 {,
spectacularly forcing a draw.}))) 21... Nh4 {(3)} 22. Qd1 {Now Yuferov is
intending to play Nc4, Ba5 and Nb6, but - too late!} Bd7 $6 {(4)} ({This is my
novelty (replacing} 22... g4 23. hxg4 hxg4 24. fxg4 Bxg4 $6 25. Nxg4 $1 {- cf.
the note to Black's 19th move).}) ({It could have been regarded as an
improvement, had it not been for a fantastic stroke found in the computer era -
} 22... Nxf3+ $3 {. For the piece Black has a very dangerous attack:} 23. gxf3
({or} 23. Bxf3 g4 24. Be2 gxh3 25. Bf3 Bg4 $1) 23... g4 24. fxg4 (24. hxg4 {
will not do:} hxg4 25. Nxg4 Nxg4 26. fxg4 Bxg4 27. Bxg4 Qh4 $1) 24... hxg4 25.
Nc4 g3 $1 26. Ng4 Nxg4 27. Bxg4 Bxg4 28. hxg4 Qh4 29. Qf3 Rc8 $1 {etc. Well,
there is logic in this: for an instant White has weakened his defences, and
his forces are stuck on the other side of the board.}) 23. Nc4 ({After the
prophylactic move} 23. Be1 {(Stohl) White has to reckon not only with} g4 ({
but also} 23... b5 {.})) 23... g4 {Now is the time!} ({Black cannot bring
himself to play} 23... b6 $6) ({while} 23... Nxf3+ $5 24. gxf3 g4 {no longer
promises more than equality after} 25. fxg4 hxg4 26. Ba5 $1 Qe8 $1 (26... gxh3+
$2 27. Kh1 $1) 27. hxg4 (27. Nb6 f3) 27... Qh5 $1 28. Kf1 Bxg4 29. Ke1 Bxe2 30.
Qxe2 f3 31. Qd3 b5 32. Nd2 {etc.}) 24. hxg4 ({If} 24. Ba5 Qe7 25. Nb6 $2 {
Crouch gives} Nxg2 ({although the decisive} 25... gxh3 $1 {is simpler.})) 24...
hxg4 25. fxg4 ({Now the inclusion of the moves} 25. Ba5 $6 Qe7 $1 (25... Nxf3+
$6 26. Bxf3 Qe7 {(e8)} 27. Be2 {is not so clear}) 26. fxg4 Nxg4 {, could have
proved fatal for White:} 27. Nxg4 Nxg2 28. Kxg2 Bxg4 29. Bxg4 Qh4 30. Qh1 Rxg4+
31. Kf3 Rg3+ 32. Ke2 Qg4+ 33. Kf2 (33. Kd2 b5 $1 {with irresistible threats})
33... Be7 $1 {.}) 25... Nxg2 $6 {This piece sacrifice was the fruit of home
analysis, but there was something that I failed to take into account.} ({First
} 25... Nxg4 {was more accurate, for example:} 26. -- (26. Nxg4 $2 Nxg2 $1 27.
Kxg2 Bxg4 28. Bxg4 Qh4 {. An already familiar situation with the sacrifice of
two pieces. With his knight on c4 White has somewhat better chances than
before, but even so his defence is extremely difficult:} 29. Qh1 ({or} 29. Kf1
Rxg4 30. Ke2 Rg3 $1) 29... Rxg4+ 30. Kf3 Rg3+ 31. Ke2 Qg4+ 32. Kf2 b5 $1 ({not
now} 32... Be7 {in view of} 33. Ra3 $1) 33. Nxe5 ({if} 33. axb5 $2) ({or} 33.
Nb6 $2 {there is the decisive} Ra7 $1) 33... dxe5 34. Rc7 Bg7 {, and 'Black
has regained the piece, and still has a strong attack' (Crouch)}) (26. Bxg4
Nxg2 27. Kf1 $1 Bxg4 28. Nxg4 Qg5 29. Nf2 (29. Kxg2 $2 Qh4) (29. Nb6 Re8) 29...
Ne3+ (29... Nh4 {is also not bad}) 30. Bxe3 fxe3 31. Qf3 exf2 32. Kxf2 {
(Crouch)} Qh4+ 33. Ke2 Qh2+ 34. Qf2 Qxf2+ 35. Kxf2 Be7 {with a roughly equal
ending.})) ({But not} 25... Bxg4 $2 26. Nxg4 Nxg2 27. Kf1 $1 {- Stohl.}) 26.
Kxg2 {Played after considerable thought;} ({White was wondering whether Black
would have been set more problems by the interposition of} 26. Ba5 {, and only
after} Qe7 {-} 27. Kxg2 Nxg4 28. Bxg4 Bxg4 29. Qxg4 $1 ({Crouch gives only} 29.
Nxg4 $2 Qh4) 29... Rxg4+ 30. Nxg4 Qh4 31. Rg1 $1 {.} -- ({. Now Black does not
have the defence} 31... Qg3+ $2 32. Kf1 Qd3+ 33. Kf2 Bg7 {as in a variation
from the game; because of the simple} ({if} 33... Qxc4 $2 34. Nxe5+) 34. Nxd6)
({, but after} 31... Kf7 $1 {he is able to neutralise the opponent's slight
plus:} 32. Kf3 ({or} 32. Nf2 Qg3+ 33. Kf1 Qb3) 32... b5 33. axb5 (33. Nb6 Qh3+
34. Ke2 Qb3 $1 {with equality}) 33... axb5 34. Nd2 Qh3+ 35. Ke2 Be7 36. Nf3 Rg8
37. Nf2 Rxg1 38. Rxg1 Qc8 39. Kd2 Qc4 {etc.})) 26... Nxg4 27. Bxg4 ({Of course,
not} 27. Nxg4 $2 Bxg4 28. Bxg4 Qh4 {.}) 27... Bxg4 28. Qxg4 $1 {An unpleasant
surprise - a counter queen sacrifice!} ({My over-optimistic analysis concluded
with a pursuit of the king:} 28. Nxg4 {(?)} Qh4 29. Qh1 ({or} 29. Kf1 Rxg4 30.
Ke2 Rg3 $1) 29... Rxg4+ 30. Kf3 Rg3+ 31. Ke2 Qg4+ 32. Kf2 b5 $1 {etc. (as in
the note to 25...Nxg2). This is what I was aiming for, and the opponent's
unexpected reply shocked me: now White has chances not only of repelling the
attack, but also of converting his material advantage! --- On the preceding
moves I had spent only 23 minutes, but now for the first time I stopped to
think: my swift attack had not succeeded, and I had to retune myself for a
more complicated fight.}) 28... Rxg4+ {(7)} ({Things are obviously worse after
} 28... Qh4 $2 29. Qxg7+ Bxg7 30. Rg1 $1 {(Stohl).}) 29. Nxg4 {What next?} Rc8
$2 {(7) This seemingly natural, developing move, to which I previously
attached an exclamation mark, proves simply to be a loss of time at a critical
moment of the battle.} ({The immediate} 29... Qh4 {would have enabled Black,
albeit not without some difficulty, to solve his problems and maintain
equality:} 30. Rg1 $1 Qg3+ $1 31. Kf1 $1 ({Stohl's variation} 31. Kh1 Qh3+ 32.
Nh2+ {is worse because of} Kf7 $1) 31... Qd3+ 32. Kf2 Bg7 $1 33. Nh6+ (33. b3
Qd4+ $1 ({but not} 33... Qxb3 $6 34. Rac1 Kf8 35. Nxd6 $1 Qb6+ 36. Ne3 $1 {
with a powerful attack})) 33... Kf8 34. Nf5 Qxc4 ({it is bad to play} 34... Rc8
$2 35. Rxg7 $1 Rxc4 36. Rh1) ({or} 34... Bf6 $6 35. Rg6 Bh4+ 36. Nxh4 Qd4+ 37.
Kf3 Qxc4 38. Rag1 $1) 35. Rxg7 {, and after} Qc2 $1 36. Rh1 Qxd2+ 37. Kf3 Qd3+
38. Kg4 Qe2+ 39. Kg5 Qg2+ 40. Kf6 Qxh1 {(Crouch) White has only perpetual
check.}) 30. Nh2 $2 {An error in reply: Yuferov cracks under the pressure and,
to his misfortune, decides to switch his knight to the blockading square f3 
(although in principle the place for it is at f2 - defending the e4-pawn!).} ({
It was also bad to play} 30. Be1 $2 Qg5 $1 31. Kf3 Qh5) ({or} 30. Na5 $2 Qh4 $1
31. Nf2 Qg3+ 32. Kf1 f3) ({while} 30. Nf2 Qg5+ 31. Kf1 Qg3 32. Ra3 f3 33. Ne3
Rxc1+ 34. Bxc1 Be7 {(Stohl) would have given Black sufficient counterplay.}) ({
However, with} 30. Kf3 $1 {White could have parried the attack and
strengthened his position:} Bg7 ({the queen on its own cannot do anything -} 
30... Qh4 $2 31. Rg1 $1 Qh3+ 32. Ke2 {with the threat of Nf2+ or Ngxe5+}) 31.
-- ({, when in the event of} 31. Rc3 {(Crouch) Black drives the knight to the
edge of the board -} b5 $1 ({not immediately} 31... Qh4 $2 32. Rg1) 32. axb5
axb5 33. Na3 {(a5)} Rxc3+ 34. Bxc3 Qh4 35. Rg1 Qh3+ 36. Ke2 Kf8 {with equality}
) ({, and therefore it is better to play} 31. Be1 $1 {(defending the h4-square
and vacating d2)} b5 32. axb5 axb5 33. Nd2 Rxc1 34. Rxc1 Qg5 (34... Kf7 35. Ke2
$1 {and Nh2-f3}) 35. Bf2 {and Rg1, with the hope of successfully regrouping
and exploiting his superiority in number of pieces.})) 30... Qh4 {(9) The
picture has suddenly changed in Black's favour. The bishop on d2 is taking
away this square from the knight, hindering the defence of the weak e4-pawn.}
31. Rc3 $2 {Mistakes come in pairs...} (31. Be1 $2 {is also hopeless in view of
} f3+ $1 32. Nxf3 Qxe4 33. Ncd2 Qe2+ 34. Kh1 ({or} 34. Kg3 Re8 {etc}) 34...
Rxc1 35. Rxc1 e4 {(Crouch)}) (31. Ra3 $2 Qh7) ({but the tension would have
been retained by} 31. Ba5 $1 f3+ 32. Nxf3 Qxe4 33. Ncd2 {, although after} Qg4+
$1 34. Kf2 Rxc1 35. Rxc1 Qxa4 {Black's chances are clearly better.}) 31... Rc7
$1 {(8) The decisive manoeuvre: a mating attack on the g-file is threatened.}
32. Rg1 {A sad necessity.} ({If} 32. Kh1 Rg7 33. Rf3 {, then} Qg5 34. Rf2 Qg3
35. Raf1 Qd3 {and wins (Stohl).}) 32... Rg7+ 33. Kh1 Rxg1+ 34. Kxg1 Qh7 $1 {It
would appear that this 'long' queen move, emphasising the undefended state of
the e4-pawn, was not expected by Yuferov: here he thought for nearly all of
his remaining time before the control.} 35. Bxf4 ({A practical chance - a
sacrifice of the bishop for the sake of saving the e4- and d5-pawns, which
would have fallen in quick succession after} 35. Nf3 Qxe4 36. Kf2 (36. Nb6 Qe2
$1 {and ...e5-e4}) 36... Qxd5 {(Stohl).}) 35... exf4 36. Nd2 Qd7 {(3) The
queen is carrying out an enormous amount of work: it both attacks the a4-pawn
and keeps an eye on the c-file and the g4-square.} ({However,} 36... Qg7+ 37.
Kf1 Qd4 {(Stohl) was also not bad.}) 37. Rc4 Bg7 {(6)} ({An experienced master
would probably have simply captured the pawn -} 37... Qg7+ $5 38. Kf1 Qxb2 {,
but I was carried away by the idea of activating my bishop to continue the
attack!}) 38. b3 Bd4+ $1 {(11) This unexpected and spectacular check prevents
White from coordinating his pieces.} 39. Kh1 (39. Rxd4 $2 Qg7+ {.}) 39... Bc5
40. Ndf3 {(there is nothing better)} b5 $1 {(22) I took my time over the last
move before the control. Black breaks up the enemy fortifications on the 4th
rank. --- Here the game was not yet adjourned, since with a time control of 2½ hours for 40 moves I had used just 1 hour 28 minutes, and although I still
had more than an hour in reserve, I continued playing very quickly.} 41. Rc2 ({
If} 41. axb5 Qxb5 42. Nd2 Be3 43. Nhf3 {Black decides matters with} Bxd2 44.
Nxd2 Qb6 {- Stohl.}) 41... Qe8 {(8) Trying to restrict White's potential
activity;} ({although again it would have been simpler to grab material:} 41...
bxa4 42. Rg2+ Kf8 43. Ng5 (43. bxa4 Qxa4) 43... Ke8 44. Ne6 Qh7 {and wins 
(Stohl).}) 42. Rg2+ Kf8 43. Ng5 Qh5 (43... Qe5 $1 {(centralisation!) was more
forceful:} 44. Nhf3 ({or} 44. Rg4 Qa1+ 45. Kg2 Qb2+) 44... Qa1+ 45. Kh2 Qh8+
46. Nh3 bxa4 47. bxa4 Ke7 48. Nfg5 Qe5 $1 {and wins. However, my plan does not
greatly lengthen the winning procedure.}) 44. Ne6+ Ke7 45. Rg7+ (45. Rg4 f3 $5
{.}) 45... Kf6 $1 46. Rg4 bxa4 47. bxa4 ({There was similarly little comfort in
} 47. Nxc5 a3 $1) ({or} 47. Rxf4+ Ke7 48. bxa4 Qd1+ {.}) 47... Be3 48. Nxf4
Bxf4 49. Rxf4+ Ke7 50. Kg2 (50. Rg4 a5 $1 {.}) 50... Qd1 {(7)} 51. Ng4 Qxa4 52.
Ne3 a5 {The outside passed pawn decides the game.} 53. Nf5+ Kd7 54. Rh4 Qc2+ (
54... Qb4 $1 {was more accurate.}) 55. Kf3 a4 {(10)} 56. Rh7+ Kd8 {Before the
end of the five hour session the players also managed to reach the second time
control!} 57. Ra7 ({It would not have helped to play} 57. Rh6 Qc3+ 58. Kg4 a3
59. Rxd6+ Kc7 60. Ra6 Qd3 61. d6+ Kb7) ({or} 57. Nxd6 a3 58. Nb7+ Kc8 $1 59.
Nd6+ (59. d6 Qb3+ {and ...Qxb7}) 59... Kb8 60. Rh8+ Ka7 61. Nb5+ Ka6 62. Ra8+
Kxb5 63. Rxa3 Qd1+ $1 64. Kf2 Qg4 65. Re3 Qf4+ 66. Ke2 Kc4 {, destroying the
fortress.}) 57... Qd3+ 58. Ne3 a3 59. Kf4 Qb3 {(4)} 60. Nf5 Qb2 {. Times: 3.
18-2.30. --- Not a bad win with Black, especially for the starting game. Of
course, with a computer to hand the mutual mistakes are very apparent, but the
character itself of the play - with some Tal-like strokes! - made a great
impression on the public. Later events in the tournament should have shown
whether this was a chance happening (the opponent was successfully caught by
some opening preparation), or indeed the result of creative improvement.} 0-1

[Event "22: Sokolsky Memorial, Minsk"]
[Site "?"]
[Date "1978.01.09"]
[Round "2"]
[White "Kasparov, G."]
[Black "Roizman, A."]
[Result "1-0"]
[ECO "C61"]
[Annotator "Garry Kasparov"]
[PlyCount "53"]
[EventDate "1978.??.??"]
[Source "Everyman Chess"]
[SourceDate "2012.11.28"]

{In the second round I was tested by the highly experienced Abram Roizman, the
author of some well-known collections of chess miniatures. In a Ruy Lopez he
quickly diverged from the main theoretical paths by choosing the rare Bird
Defence. However, this did not disturb me, and I passed this next test. The
result was in fact almost a miniature, which so appealed to Botvinnik that he
even briefly annotated it for the Yugoslav Informator and a number of Soviet
publications.} 1. e4 e5 2. Nf3 Nc6 3. Bb5 Nd4 {I did not have any deep
knowledge of the Bird Defence, but here the first few moves for White simply
suggest themselves.} 4. Nxd4 exd4 5. O-O Bc5 ({Avoiding the variation} 5... c6
6. Bc4 -- (6... Nf6 7. Re1 d6 {(Tsarenkov-Roizman, Moscow 1974), possibly
because of} 8. c3 $1 {.}) ({. And the direct} 6... d5 {(instead of 6...Nf6)} 7.
exd5 cxd5 8. Bb5+ Bd7 9. Re1+ Ne7 {is very risky in view of} 10. c4 $1 a6 {(it
is already hard to offer Black any good advice)} 11. Bxd7+ Qxd7 12. d3 O-O-O $6
13. Nd2 Kb8 14. b4 $1 {with a winning attack (Kasparov-Khalifman, Moscow 
(rapid) 2002).} (14. --))) 6. d3 ({Against Kupreichik (Daugavpils 1978) I
tried the immediate} 6. Bc4 {(with the threat of Bxf7+) and after} d6 {-} 7. b4
$5 ({instead of the usual} 7. d3) 7... Bb6 ({somewhat sounder than} 7... Bxb4
8. Qh5 Qd7 9. Bxf7+ $1) 8. a4 a6 (8... a5 $5) 9. d3 Ne7 10. Qh5 O-O 11. Bg5 Be6
12. Nd2 {with slightly the better game for White, but that was at the finish
of the tournament and I was satisfied with a draw.}) 6... c6 7. Bc4 {(7)} (7.
Ba4 $1 {is considered more unpleasant for Black, and if} Ne7 {, then} (7... d6
8. f4 f5 $1 {became topical, when it is not clear how White can gain an
advantage (Novik-Meister, 48th USSR Championship, Moscow 1991)}) 8. f4 {with
the threat of f4-f5;} ({the more modest} 8. Nd2 d5 {was played in
Karpov-Kupreichik, 44th USSR Championship, Moscow 1976}) 8... f5 9. Bb3 $1 d5
10. exd5 Nxd5 11. Re1+ {beginning a direct attack on the king (Kamsky-Ivanchuk,
Tilburg 1990). --- But I withdrew my bishop to c4 without particular
hesitation, since I had already played this, and - more importantly - I
remembered a game recently published in the Riga magazine 'Shakhmaty', where
White quickly advanced e4-e5. This idea was imprinted in my mind, and I
decided to employ it.}) 7... d6 ({Black solves his opening problems with} 7...
d5 $5 {(this has been played several times by Kupreichik and Tseshkovsky, and
back in 1876 - by Henry Bird himself!). However, as I anticipated, in a game
with a junior Roizman was aiming for more complicated play.}) 8. f4 {(3) 
'Typical of Kasparov's style: he begins active play at the first opportunity' 
(Botvinnik).} ({It would appear that the master was expecting} 8. c3 Nf6 {, as
in my game with Gorelov (Vilnius 1975), where White did not achieve anything
from the opening.}) ({Lothar Schmid's move} 8. Qh5 $5 {is objectively stronger,
but I was aiming for 'the position from the magazine'.}) 8... Nf6 9. e5 {(2)} (
{This breakthrough, rather than} 9. f5 {, when} d5 $1 10. exd5 cxd5 {is good.})
({Even so, more chances of an advantage are promised by the developing} 9. Nd2
{(a move of 1998).}) 9... dxe5 $6 ({Of course, '} 9... Nd5 {was more cautious,
not allowing the opening of the f-file' (Botvinnik). After} 10. Bxd5 cxd5 {
Black has a solid position (Barle-Stoica, Bucharest 1976).}) ({The sharper} 
9... Ng4 {is also interesting:} 10. h3 ({it is bad to play} 10. Bxf7+ $2 Kxf7
11. e6+ Bxe6 12. f5 Qh4 $1 13. fxe6+ Ke7 14. h3 Ne3 {and wins, Bashkov-Meister,
Taby 1991}) 10... -- ({, and now} 10... Ne3 $6 11. Bxe3 dxe3 12. d4 Bb6 13. c3)
({, or} 10... d5 11. hxg4 dxc4 12. Nd2 {(} h5 13. f5 $1 {) is better for White}
) ({, but} 10... Nh6 {(Stohl)} 11. exd6 {(otherwise ...d6-d5)} O-O 12. Nd2 (12.
g4 $5) 12... Bxd6 13. Ne4 Nf5 {is not so clear.})) 10. Bxf7+ $5 {I could not
resist the temptation to land a spectacular blow at this weak point.} ({
However,} 10. fxe5 $1 Nd5 (10... Bg4 $2 11. Bxf7+) 11. Nd2 {(Stohl) was
stronger, with rapid development and excellent attacking prospects, for
example:} O-O (11... Ne3 $2 12. Bxf7+) 12. Ne4 Be7 13. Qh5 Be6 14. Bg5 Kh8 15.
Rae1 {, and if} Qc7 $2 {, then} 16. Bf6 $1 {. This is why Black should not
have opened the f-file.}) 10... Kxf7 11. fxe5 {'Now Black is deprived of the
right to castle, and White will have the superior pawn formation, but most
importantly - great complications begin. However, Roizman succeeds in
repelling the first onslaught.' (Botvinnik)} Qd5 $1 ({After this Black
practically equalises (in contrast to Stohl's variation} 11... Be7 $6 12. exf6
Bxf6 13. Bg5 {), and it is comparatively easy for him to defend.}) 12. exf6
gxf6 13. Nd2 Rg8 {'Black demonstrates that he has his own play - on the
g-file' (Botvinnik). Roizman was apparently relying on this and on his two
bishops, assuming that these factors would fully compensate for the defects of
his pawn structure.} 14. Ne4 Be7 15. Bf4 {(6)} Rg6 16. Qe2 {(13)} (16. Qd2 $5 {
was slightly more accurate - White could have gained a tempo for his
development, since} Bg4 {would not have attacked anything.}) 16... Bg4 17. Qf2
Rag8 {'Black himself plays for an attack, but he leaves his king in a
dangerous position.} (17... Kg7 {followed by ...Kh8 suggests itself' 
(Botvinnik).}) ({Or} 17... Kg8 18. Rae1 Be6 {and ...Re8.}) 18. Rae1 {Also
completing his development. 'White displays enviable coolness: he does not
fear an attack on the g2-pawn, since he can block the g-file with a minor
piece. Therefore Black includes his h7-pawn in the play.' (Botvinnik)} h5 $6 {
Overestimating his attacking possibilities, Roizman forgets about the weakness
of his own king!} ({'After} 18... Kg7 {Black must reckon with the unpleasant}
19. c4 ({or} 19. c3 $5 {.})) ({However,} 18... Be6 $1 {is more in keeping with
the previous move; then} 19. Bg3 h5 20. Qf4 ({the game is also roughly equal
after} 20. Re2 h4 21. Bxh4 Rxg2+ 22. Qxg2 Rxg2+ 23. Rxg2 f5 24. Bxe7 Kxe7 25.
Rg7+ Kd8 26. Rxb7 Qxa2) 20... f5 {gives chances for both sides' (Stohl). Say,}
21. h4 (21. Qc7 Ke8 $1) 21... R8g7 {(with the idea of ...Kg8)} 22. Qb8 Rg8 23.
Qc7 Qd7 {with equality} ({but not now} 23... Ke8 $2 24. Ng5 $1 {. --- It
seemed to Roizman that Black had no serious problems and that he would be able
to play ...Be6 a move later, but my reply threw him into confusion.})) 19. Bg5
$1 {(9) Blocking the g-file and piling up on the weak f6-point. --- Here my
opponent sank for a long time into agonising thought...} ({'Just when the
opponent was beginning to feel confident, White lands an unexpected blow -} 19.
Bg5 $2 Rxg5 $2 {, fails to} ({or} 19... Bh3 $2 20. Nxf6 $1 {- G.K.}) 20. Nxf6
$1 {, when Black's position collapses. The insecure position of his king
begins to tell.' (Botvinnik)}) ({The tempting} 19. Bd6 $6 {would have been
much weaker in view of} Be6 $1 20. Bxe7 Rxg2+ 21. Qxg2 Rxg2+ 22. Kxg2 Kxe7 23.
Rxf6 (23. Kg1 Kd8 $1) 23... Qxa2 24. Rh6 Kd8 {, when Black is alright.}) 19...
Qd8 {(67) A psychologically difficult decision - withdrawing the queen from
the centre to the rear.} ({The commentators recommended} 19... Be6 {as the
lesser evil, but then} 20. Kh1 $1 {is strong, for example:} Qd8 ({or} 20... Bh3
21. Qf3 Be6 22. Bh4) 21. h4 Bg4 22. Ng3 Kg7 23. Bd2 {with the threat of Nf5+ 
(and if} Qd7 {, then} 24. Re4 $1 {), and Black has a difficult position.}) 20.
Qf4 {(5) Audaciously leaving the bishop on g5 (from where it can no longer
retreat!).} ({What told was childish euphoria after my previous day's win over
Yuferov - absolute recklessness...} 20. Bh4 $1 {(Stohl)} Be6 21. Ng3 Rg4 22.
Re4 $1 {was better, with a clear advantage: by exchanging a pair of rooks
White relieves the pressure on g2, whereas the f6- and h5-pawns are
chronically weak.}) 20... Be6 ({After} 20... Kg7 $6 {I would have probably
'thought better of it' and played} 21. Bh4 {.}) 21. h4 $5 {(37) 'Burning his
boats behind him - the bishop will have nowhere to go. But what happens next?'
(Botvinnik).} ({The no less garish} 21. Qe5 $5 {also came into consideration -
but after} Bd5 (21... Qd5 $2 22. Bxf6 $1) 22. h4 $1 Kg7 $1 23. Qxd4 Kh7 {Black
somehow holds on.}) ({Therefore the strongest was} 21. g3 $1 {, killing the
counterplay on the g-file and retaining a loophole for the bishop at h4 
(although here White's advantage is not so obvious as after 20 Bh4!).}) 21...
Bd5 ({Moving the bishop out of range (} 21... Kg7 $2 22. Nxf6 {).} ({'Black
evidently suspected that there was only one danger:} 22. Bxf6+ Rxf6 23. Qh6+ $1
{with irresistible threats. But there now follows a new blow!})) ({The only
possibility of continuing the fight was} 21... Bg4 {' (Botvinnik). And indeed,
after} 22. Nf2 (22. Bh6 Re8 $1) 22... Bd6 (22... Be6 $2 23. Re5 $1) 23. Qd2 Bf5
24. Ne4 {White's advantage, although enduring, is not so great. However, 21...
Bd5 is also not a bad move.}) 22. g4 $5 {(5) This pawn thrust, immediately
following h2-h4, shook both Roizman and those present in the auditorium: is it
really possible to play like this?! 'A move, shocking in its audacity, and at
the same time logical and highly effective' (Nikitin). 'Played contrary to
routine positional dogmas - White himself opens up the position of his king.
But what is important is that the rook on g6 turns out to be in danger, and
this decides the game' (Botvinnik). --- Alas, here my Teacher was exaggerating:
after the correct reply by the opponent, White would have had nothing decisive.
} ({And, perhaps,} 22. Qe5 {should have been tried - although after} Kg7 $1 23.
Qxd4 Kh7 {Black could still have defended (as after 21 Qe5) and happily
avoided the crushing defeat which he soon suffers. --- I think that after 22
g4 my opponent literally fell into a stupor and was no longer in a condition
to fight, especially with time-trouble approaching.}) 22... Kg7 $2 {A fatal
mistake.} ({'A belated retreat. If} 22... hxg4 $2 {there would have followed}
23. h5 $1 {.}) ({Black could hardly have prolonged the resistance by} 22...
Bxe4 {on account of} 23. gxh5 -- (23... R6g7 24. Rxe4 {' (Botvinnik).}) ({. It
was also bad to play} 23... Rh6 24. Rxe4 Rxh5 25. Qg4 {etc. (Stohl)}) ({, but} 
23... Rxg5+ $1 {was far more resilient:} 24. hxg5 Qd5 $1 {(threatening ...
Rxg5+!)} 25. g6+ Bxg6 26. Rxe7+ Kxe7 27. Qxf6+ Kd7 28. hxg6 Qe6 29. Qf7+ $1 (
29. Qxd4+ Kc7 {with equality}) 29... Qxf7 30. Rxf7+ Ke6 31. Rxb7 Rxg6+ {with
drawing chances in the rook endgame a pawn down.})) ({True, if} 22... Bxe4 {,
then} 23. Rxe4 $5 hxg4 24. Qe5 {(f5) looks strong.}) ({But it is something
else that is important: Black could simply have defended his attacked h5-pawn
by} 22... Rh8 $1 {. Against this I had prepared} 23. Bxf6 Bxf6 (23... Rxg4+ $2
24. Qxg4 hxg4 25. Bxe7+ Kxe7 26. Nc5+ $1) 24. g5 Bxe4 25. Rxe4 -- (25... Kg7 {
(?)} 26. Kh2 $1 ({but not} 26. Re6 $2 Re8 $1) 26... Rf8 27. Re6 {, and White
is on the verge of winning.}) ({. However - oh horrors! - the computer move} 
25... Rf8 $1 {, pointed out by Stohl in the 21st Century, would have refuted
my idea and led to equality:} 26. -- (26. Rxd4 Qe8 $1 27. Kh2 ({also nothing
is given by} 27. Rd6 Kg7) ({or} 27. Re4 Qd8 $1) 27... Kg7 ({or} 27... Kg8) 28.
gxf6+ Rfxf6 29. Qc7+ Kh6 30. Re4 Qxe4 31. dxe4 Rxf1) (26. Kh2 $2 Kg8 {and wins.
}) (26. Qf5 Kg7 27. Re6 Qd5 $1 28. Qxd5 cxd5 29. Kh1 Rf7 30. gxf6+ Rgxf6 {.})))
({It is also not possible to find an advantage for White after} 22... Rh8 23.
gxh5 (23. Qe5 hxg4 $1) 23... Rxh5 24. Ng3 ({or} 24. Qg4 Rhh6 25. Ng3 Rh7 26. h5
Rgg7 27. Qf4 Kg8 $1 28. Rxe7 Rxg5 29. Rxh7 Kxh7) 24... Bd6 ({and} 24... Rh7 25.
h5 {(a variation by Stohl) is highly dubious, since Black does not have the
resource} Rxg5 $2 26. Qxg5 Rg7 {on account of} 27. Rxe7+ $1 Qxe7 28. Qxg7+ Kxg7
29. Nf5+ {and Nxe7}) ({but on the other hand} 24... Rh8 $1 {is quite suitable
- if now} 25. h5 {, then} Rxg5 $1 26. Qxg5 Rg8 27. Qh4 Bd6 28. Rf4 Bxf4 29.
Qxf4 Qd7 {with equality}) 25. Qxf6+ $1 Rxf6 26. Nxh5 Bh2+ $1 27. Kxh2 Qb8+ 28.
Nf4 Rf5 {is unclear.}) 23. gxh5 {(2)} fxg5 24. Qe5+ Kh6 (24... Rf6 25. Nxf6
Bxf6 26. h6+ $1 {.}) 25. hxg6 gxh4 26. Rf5 $1 {The most accurate solution.}
Kxg6 {This leads to instant death;} ({but Black would not have saved the game
with} 26... Rxg6+ 27. Kh2 {(f2)}) ({or} 26... Bxe4 27. Rxe4 Rxg6+ 28. Kh2 Bf6
29. Rxh4+ $1 Kg7 30. Rxf6 Qxf6 31. Qc7+ {, picking up with checks the pawns on
b7 and a7, and then also on d4.}) 27. Kh2 {. My favourite 'Spanish' move, in
this case vacating a square for the rook. In view of unavoidable mate, Black
resigned. --- Times: 1.45-2.16. --- 'A dynamic game!' (Botvinnik). --- This
second crushing win conclusively stifled the gossip on the topic 'why has a
boy been allowed into this strong tournament?' Everyone was intrigued - did I
have sufficient powder in my keg?!} 1-0

[Event "23: Sokolsky Memorial, Minsk"]
[Site "?"]
[Date "1978.01.11"]
[Round "3"]
[White "Shereshevski, M."]
[Black "Kasparov, G."]
[Result "0-1"]
[ECO "A48"]
[Annotator "Garry Kasparov"]
[PlyCount "64"]
[EventDate "1978.??.??"]
[Source "Everyman Chess"]
[SourceDate "2012.11.28"]

{In the 3rd round I played Mikhail Shereshevsky, a subtle positional master,
later a well-known trainer, and the author of some interesting books on the
endgame. He treated our game more seriously than my two previous opponents,
and he decided to altogether avoid theoretical debates, trying to outplay his
comparatively inexperienced opponent in a rare opening scheme. This plan
almost succeeded, but at the decisive opponent, when a direct clash ensued,
the master flinched...} 1. d4 Nf6 2. Nf3 g6 3. Bf4 {One of Shereshevsky's two
favourite schemes (the other was 2 Bg5), where subsequently he did not employ
the standard c2-c3 and Nbd2, but the unusual Nc3 - with his pawn on c2!} Bg7 ({
Against Kagan in the 12th round I played more originally and again 'in
Gligoric style' -} 3... d6 4. e3 Nh5 5. Bg5 h6 6. Bh4 g5 7. Nfd2 Ng7 $1 8. Bg3
Nf5 {, nevertheless exchanging knight for bishop.}) 4. e3 d6 5. Be2 O-O 6. O-O
(6. h3 {would have led to a position from the game Sturua-Kasparov (Riga 1977),
where after} b6 7. O-O c5 8. Nbd2 Ba6 $5 {Black achieved good play. However,
the master has a different idea.}) 6... c5 {(4)} 7. Nc3 {This move somewhat
embarrassed me;} ({everyone almost exclusively played} 7. h3) ({or immediately
} 7. c3 {. The position of the pawn at c2 looks strange, but at least the
knight is developed at an active position.}) 7... b6 {(2)} 8. h3 {Here I
stopped to think: how does Black best complete his development?} Na6 {(13)} ({
A more committing move than the simple} 8... Bb7 {(hindering d4-d5) and then ...Nbd7 or ...Nc6 (this is what I would probably play now).}) 9. Re1 $6 {
Over-modest, but this 'non-contact battle' was the point of Shereshevsky's
play. 'White chose a waiting opening strategy, denying his energetic opponent
specific targets to attack' (Nikitin).} ({White should have considered the
cramping} 9. d5 $5 Nc7 10. a4 $1 ({but not} 10. e4 b5 $1 11. e5 dxe5 12. Bxe5
b4) {, although all the same Black has a normal 'Indian' set-up (White has
lost a tempo on e2-e3), and in order to avoid e3-e4 even} 10... Nh5 11. Bh2 f5
{is possible.}) 9... Nc7 {(9)} 10. Bf1 ({Having said 'A', White must also say
'B', especially as it is now too late for} 10. d5 {because of} b5 $1 {.}) 10...
Bb7 {As a result Black has very comfortable development and the more flexible
position, giving him chances of seizing the initiative. It is now up to White
to devise something.} 11. Bh2 $6 ({Taking into account the further
developments in the game,} 11. Bg3 {was more accurate, and if} Nd7 ({Black
would have had the good reply} 11... cxd4 $5 12. exd4 Ne6) 12. a4 $1 {, then}
Bxf3 13. Qxf3 cxd4 14. exd4 Bxd4 15. Rad1 Ne6 16. Nd5 Bxb2 17. c3 {with sharp
play.}) 11... Nd7 {(13)} ({Here too} 11... cxd4 $5 12. exd4 Ne6 {came into
consideration. But 11...Nd7 seemed far more energetic to me, since it
immediately creates a threat to the d4-pawn.}) 12. a4 $1 {A clever and
provocative reply, the strength of which I underestimated. After sacrificing
the d4-pawn, White obtains appreciable pressure in return. Shereshevsky's
psychological reckoning was correct: it was far more unpleasant for me to
suppress the opponent's initiative than for me myself to attack.} ({Besides,} 
12. Be2 Rc8) ({or the 'Sicilian-like'} 12. e4 cxd4 13. Nxd4 Rc8 {would have
been altogether tedious for White.}) 12... Bxf3 ({Perhaps the waiting move} 
12... a6 $5 {should have been preferred - to see what White will do next 
(which is not very clear). But I played, and quite quickly, as ordained by the
classics: if no immediate danger is apparent, you should capture a pawn! And
the more so if it is a central one...}) 13. Qxf3 cxd4 14. exd4 Bxd4 15. Rad1
Ne6 {(7)} 16. Bg3 $1 {Both defending the f2-pawn, and possibly including the
bishop in the attack via h4. The position turned out to be very complicated,
and it was unclear to me what Black should play here.} Rc8 {(13)} ({Also in
the event of} 16... Ndc5 17. Bh4 ({or} 17. Nd5 $1 {White has excellent
compensation for the pawn.})) 17. Nd5 $1 {(the sacrifice of a second
infantryman!)} Bxb2 $5 {(45)} ({Of course, not} 17... Rxc2 $2 18. Qe4 {.}) ({
But also after the cautious} 17... Bg7 18. c3) ({or} 17... Nf6 18. c3 Nxd5 19.
cxd4 Nb4 20. d5 Nc5 21. Qe2 $1 Re8 22. Qd2 a5 23. Bb5 Rf8 24. Bf4 {Black has a
rather unpleasant position and his extra pawn is not felt. Therefore after a
long think - a record one for me in those years - I decided to take a risk.})
18. c3 {Now the bishop is cut off and White's threats are genuinely dangerous.}
Ne5 $2 {For a long time I considered this to be an excellent move (a queen
sacrifice!) and my trainer Nikitin, annotating the game for ChessBase and his
book, awarded it an exclamation mark. But in fact after it Black is on the
verge of defeat!} ({The unsophisticated} 18... Ba3 {was correct, and although
after the energetic} 19. Bh4 Ne5 20. Qg3 g5 21. f4 $1 {White retains the
initiative, the situation remains double-edged:} Kh8 22. fxe5 Rg8 23. Ba6 Rb8
24. Kh1 Rg7 25. Ne3 Qg8 26. Nf5 gxh4 27. Qxh4 dxe5 28. Nxg7 Qxg7 {- Black has
two pawns for the exchange and his pieces are active.}) 19. Bxe5 dxe5 20. Rxe5
$2 ({It stands to reason that} 20. Nf6+ $2 {is weak in view of} exf6 21. Rxd8
Rfxd8 22. Qxf6 Bxc3 23. Rc1 Bd4 {, when White's f2-point begins to 'creak'.}) (
20. Re2 {is also unfavourable:} Ba3 21. Nf6+ exf6 22. Rxd8 Rfxd8 23. Qxf6 Bf8 {
(d6) with equality.}) (20. Rd2 $2 Bxc3 $1 {.}) ({However, the unexpected,
typically computer-like 'backwards leap'} 20. Ne3 $1 {would have led to the
trapping of the misplaced bishop:} Qc7 (20... Qe8 $2 21. Bb5) 21. Nc4 Bxc3 (
21... e4 22. Qe3) 22. Qxc3 {, and the three black pawns are inadequate
compensation for the piece. It would appear that White has a technically won
position.}) 20... Kg7 {(5) After making this prophylactic move, I promptly
offered my opponent a draw, which surprised many people. With time-trouble
imminent (I had about 30 minutes left for 20 moves) I decided that White's
activity fully compensated for the sacrificed pawn and that a draw with Black
after two wins would be an excellent result. --- But, to all appearances,
Shereshevsky interpreted my draw offer as an indication of uncertainty or even
weakness: he immediately launched into an attack - and miscalculated somewhere.
} 21. Nf4 $2 (21. Ne3 $2 Qc7 22. Nc4 {no longer works because of} Ba3 {- the
rook at e5 is attacked.}) ({The best continuation was probably} 21. Ba6 Rc5 ({
it is also possible to avoid cutting off the bishop's retreat from b2 -} 21...
Rc6 22. Nxe7 Rxc3) 22. Re2 Nc7 $1 23. Ne3 (23. Bb7 $6 Nxd5 24. Rxb2 e6 $1)
23... Qe8 24. Bb5 Nxb5 25. axb5 Bxc3 26. Nd5 {, regaining the material with a
draw:} Qc8 ({or} 26... Qa8 27. Rxe7 Kh8 $1 28. Rxf7 Bg7) 27. Rxe7 Qf5 $1 {.})
21... Rxc3 $1 {(5) An interposition, which changes the situation in Black's
favour: he wins a pawn and seizes the initiative.} ({Whereas} 21... Qe8 $2 {
would have lost a piece:} 22. Bb5 $1 Rxc3 23. Qe2 Nxf4 24. Qxb2 {(a pin on the
long diagonal!)} Qa8 25. f3 Rfc8 (25... Nxh3+ 26. Kh2 $1) 26. Re3 Nd5 27. Rdd3
{etc.}) 22. Nxe6+ ({If} 22. Qg4 {, then} Qc8 ({but not} 22... Qc7 $2 23. Rxe6
$1)) ({The exchanging operation} 22. Rxd8 Rxf3 23. Nxe6+ fxe6 24. Rxf8 Rxf8 25.
Rxe6 {would have led after} Ba3 26. Bb5 Bc5 27. Re2 Rd8 {to a difficult (but
perhaps not lost) endgame where White is a pawn down.}) 22... fxe6 23. Qe2 $2 (
{If not} 23. Rxd8 $5 Rcxf3 {(cf. above)}) ({then} 23. Qg4 {was correct,
although after} Qc7 {(c8) all the same White is a pawn down and can only pin
his hopes on the opposite-colour bishops.}) 23... Qc7 $1 24. Rxe6 Ba3 $1 {
Beforehand Shereshevsky overlooked this simple defence: it is not just that
White is a pawn down - his f2-point is also catastrophically weak.} 25. Qd2 {
Other moves are no better.} Rf4 $6 {(5) A seemingly logical move. 'The black
heavy pieces have suddenly become amazingly coordinated and effective' 
(Nikitin).} ({But later I came to the conclusion that} 25... Rc6 {would have
been simpler, with an extra pawn and an obvious advantage (} 26. Qd4+ Rf6 {).})
({And only when I was preparing this book, now with the help of a computer,
did I discover a staggering trick -} 25... Rxf2 $5 26. Qxf2 (26. Kxf2 $2 Rc2)
26... Bc5 27. Rd4 Ra3 $3 {(after the a-pawn!)} 28. Kh1 (28. a5 Ra4 $1) 28...
Rxa4 29. Bc4 Ra1+ 30. Bf1 a5 $1 {followed by} 31. -- Rxf1+ 32. Qxf1 Bxd4 {with
three pawns for the exchange and real winning chances.}) 26. Rde1 $2 {
Strangely enough, the 'logical' rook lunge to f4 brought me a quick win: my
opponent simply cracked.} (26. g3 $1 {was necessary, and if} Rxa4 {(?), then}
27. Rde1 $1 {. It is not so easy to see such a quiet move in time-trouble in
the fifth hour of play. White has every chance of saving the game:} a6 ({or} 
27... Rc6 28. Qd1 $1 Rc2 29. Qa1+ Kg8 30. R6e3 $1) 28. Qg5 Kh8 29. Rxg6 {.
Therefore Black would have had to retreat - 26...Rf7!, nevertheless retaining
the advantage. --- But Shereshevsky played the immediate 26 Rde1, which
seemingly looks natural: why waste time on g2-g3?}) 26... Rc2 $1 {(2) This
was overlooked by White.} ({Incidentally, here too after} 26... Rxa4 {(?) he
would have been saved by} 27. g3 $1 {as in the previous note, although it
remains an open question how Shereshevsky would have played.} (27. Qg5 $2 Qf4
$1 {.})) 27. Qd1 (27. Qd3 Bd6 $1 {.}) 27... Qc5 $2 {(5) Again a spectacular,
but second-rate move and, alas, not a 'fearful blow, shattering White's
defences' (Nikitin).} ({Later we discovered some far more convincing ways to
win -} 27... Bd6 $1) ({or} 27... Rcxf2 $1 28. Qa1+ Bb2 $1 29. Rxe7+ Qxe7 30.
Rxe7+ Kh6 {(f6), and there is no way of saving the game.}) ({But not} 27...
Rfxf2 $2 28. Qa1+ {.}) 28. Rxe7+ Kh6 29. R7e2 (29. Qd7 {(launching a desperate
attack)} Qxf2+ 30. Kh2 Bxe7 31. Rxe7 {came into consideration, although after}
Qd4 $1 32. Rxh7+ Kg5 33. Qxd4 (33. Qe7+ $2 Rf6) 33... Rxd4 34. Rxa7 Rdd2 {
White has a difficult ending.}) 29... Rxf2 30. Kh1 $2 {The final mistake.} ({
The only chance was} 30. Rxc2 Rxc2+ 31. Kh1 {, when Black would have had to
overcome considerable technical difficulties: the attack peters out, and left
on the board are opposite-colour bishops with their drawing tendencies.}) 30...
Rfxe2 $1 {(2)} 31. Bxe2 (31. Rxe2 Rc1 32. Qd2+ Qg5 33. Qxg5+ Kxg5 34. Rf2 Bc5
35. Rf7 Ra1 36. Kh2 h5 $1 {was also hopeless. 'White does not want to go down
on his knees and he dies standing up' (Nikitin). By allowing a genuine
knock-out blow...}) 31... Qf2 $1 32. Kh2 Qf4+ {. Times: 2.20-2.23. --- My
third successive win made an even greater impression. Unexpectedly I became
the tournament leader! I remember how on the tram on the way back from the
game I was discussing variations with my opponent, and Shereshevsky asked me
in surprise: 'Listen, but how did you contrive not to win the world under-17
championship?!'} (32... -- {But in the 4th round I lost with Black to Dydyshko,
and I was immediately caught by five players, including Lutikov. However, the
grandmaster was not in the lead for long: soon he fell away, after losing in
the 7th round to the second favourite - Kupreichik (who had started sluggishly
with four draws). Whereas I scored another three successive wins - over
Kapengut, Veremeichik and Begun, reached 6 out of 7 and again assumed the sole
lead, this time to the end of the tournament. --- From the press: 'After
Kasparov won yet another game, one of the spectators said despairingly:
"Somehow in Belorussia we've forgotten how to play. Our masters are losing to
a boy." Standing alongside, the normally taciturn Latvian master Yanis Klovans
could not refrain from responding: "There's no need for you to be upset.
You'll very soon be hearing about this boy".'}) (32... -- {In the 8th round I
made a short draw with Black against Zakharov. But in the 9th, against the
local candidate master Valery Smirnov, in the most vexing fashion I let my
opponent off the hook, and for a long time I could not forgive myself. A few
moves before the time control I had a completely won endgame, but while I was
strolling about on the stage, Albert Kapengut amicably whispered in my ear
that awaiting me in the hotel was the second volume of The Count of Monte
Cristo (the book had been brought by a relative of Kapengut - Tamara Golovey).
I was so overjoyed that I immediately began to 'flounder', and instead of an
elementary win the result was a draw. --- True, the following day I won
against Lyuboshits and, with 8 points out of 10, I was able to maintain the
high tempo adopted at the start. Of great importance for the outcome of the
tournament was the result of the 11th round game with my main pursuer -
Kupreichik, who had now warmed up. It was adjourned in an ending with some
advantage for my eminent opponent, but I managed to gain a draw. Then in the
12th round I defeated Kagan and five rounds before the finish I had achieved
the cherished master norm - 9½ points!}) (32... -- {This greatly exceeded
our initial plan. Alexander Nikitin recalls: 'Before the tournament I
suggested to Garry the following "optimal" spread of results, which would take
him slightly over the master norm: 1) A cautious start (3½ out of 6) - he
needed to become accustomed to the completely new atmosphere of a fierce,
purely adult event; 2) A vigorous middlegame, which would determine overall
success; 3) A restrained finish (2½ out of 5) - it was not known how Garry
would stand up to the rigours of 17 games. --- 'However, his very first games
staggered everyone - the fans, trainers and, above all, the players themselves.
The tournament immediately became a notable event in the sporting life of the
city. Spectators came along to see Kasparov. The play of the young man from
Baku was distinguished by its unusual freshness and a kind of mysterious
strength. The clever manoeuvres of his pieces literally caused the heads of
his opponents to spin. He conducted the event in inspired fashion...'}) (32...
-- {In the 13th round I made a quick draw with Klovans, and then I won against
Mariasin and Litvinov - 12 out of 15! The second-placed Kupreichik was 1½
points behind. But in the 16th, penultimate round he defeated Smirnov, whereas
I lost ignominiously to Mochalov (what evidently told was the accumulated
psychological fatigue). And the competitive situation suddenly sharpened: now
the leaders were separated by just half a point.}) 0-1

[Event "24: Sokolsky Memorial, Minsk"]
[Site "?"]
[Date "1978.02.02"]
[Round "17"]
[White "Kasparov, G."]
[Black "Lutikov, A."]
[Result "1-0"]
[ECO "A41"]
[Annotator "Garry Kasparov"]
[PlyCount "113"]
[EventDate "1978.??.??"]
[Source "Everyman Chess"]
[SourceDate "2012.11.28"]

{Everything was decided by the last round. There was no doubt that Kupreichik
would beat the outsider Lyuboshits - and he won. Thus in order to occupy sole
first place I needed to win 'to order' against Lutikov - my first one-to-one
game with a grandmaster! His best chess years may have been behind him, but
his enormous experience made him a very dangerous opponent... I didn't know
exactly what I would do, and I simply went along to play 'good' chess: I had
already become a master, and now I wanted to win the tournament. It is hardly
surprising that this far from faultless game is one that I have remembered all
my life.} 1. d4 Nf6 2. Nf3 d6 ({The King's Indian move} 2... g6 {is more
flexible, since the d7-pawn retains freedom of choice (} 3. Nc3 d5 $1 {),
whereas now White acquires an additional opportunity to fight for the centre
with e2-e4. But the 'sideways' move chosen by Lutikov is not really so bad:
Black wants in the first instance to solve the problem of developing his
queen's bishop.}) 3. Nc3 Bg4 ({Subtlety against subtlety: Black avoids the
Pirc-Ufimtsev Defence (} 3... g6 4. e4 Bg7 {)}) ({or the Philidor Defence (} 
3... Nbd7 4. e4 e5 {), against which I did not object.}) (3... Bf5 4. Nh4 Bd7 {
is also interesting (Azmaiparashvili-Lutikov, Kutaisi 1978).}) 4. e4 {Already
a turning-point in the game!} Nbd7 $2 {Either carelessness, or provocation:
after all, to try and refute the opponent's risky idea I was obliged to decide
on the sharp advance of my e-pawn, in a situation where I could not afford to
lose. --- Meanwhile, as has been known since the start of the last century,
Black has two comparatively sound continuations:} (4... c6 {(a compatriot of
Lutikov, the Moldovan master Chebanenko, was a great expert on this variation)}
5. h3 Bh5 ({Petrosian upheld} 5... Bxf3 6. Qxf3 Nbd7 7. Be3 e6 {and ...d6-d5})
6. Bd3 e6 7. Qe2 d5 {, and Black has an acceptable game (Deep Blue-Kasparov,
4th match game, New York 1997)}) (4... e6 5. Be2 ({or} 5. h3 Bh5 6. Qe2 $5 a6
$5 7. g4 Bg6 8. h4 h5 9. g5 Nfd7 {with sharp play (Su.Polgar-Anand, Amsterdam
1990)}) 5... Be7 6. O-O O-O 7. Be3 (7. h3 Bh5 8. Be3 c6 {and ...d6-d5 leads to
variation 'a', Ponomariov-Grischuk, 2nd match game, Khanty-Mansiysk 2005}) 7...
Nbd7 8. Nd2 Bxe2 9. Qxe2 c5 {with a solid position (Kasparov-Short, 5th rapid
match game, London 1987). --- This rare, somewhat passive set-up still
attracts Black, since it enables him to avoid the well-studied main opening
lines. However, the move 4...Nbd7?, which was quickly made by Lutikov, allows
a very dangerous breakthrough in the centre. Initially I even did not believe
my eyes! But, after calculating some simple variations, I accepted the
challenge.}) 5. e5 $1 {(2)} Ng8 ({Black is forced to retreat, since} 5... dxe5
6. dxe5 Bxf3 7. Qxf3 Nxe5 8. Qxb7 {is unacceptable for him.}) 6. h3 Bxf3 ({If} 
6... Bh5 {both} 7. g4 Bg6 8. h4 ({and the immediate} 8. e6 $1 fxe6 9. Ng5 {are
good, when Black's position is unenviable}) {, with the idea of} 8... h5 9. e6
$1 {.}) 7. Qxf3 c6 {It is apparent that White has already achieved much, but
what next?} 8. Bf4 {(6) With the intention of provoking ...d6-d5 and only
then carrying out the impeding pawn sacrifice e5-e6, although now it is no
longer so effective - Black has gained a respite.} ({Therefore serious
consideration should have been given to opening up the game by} 8. exd6 $5 exd6
(8... e6 9. Bf4 {- cf. the following note}) 9. d5 ({or} 9. Bf4 {and 0-0-0 with
a powerful initiative.})) 8... d5 {Falling in with my idea.} ({After both} 8...
dxe5 9. dxe5 e6 10. O-O-O) ({and} 8... e6 9. exd6 Ngf6 (9... Ndf6 $6 10. d5 $1)
10. Be2 Nb6 11. Qg3 Qd7 ({or} 11... Nfd5 12. Nxd5 Nxd5 13. Be5 f6 14. c4 $1 {
White also has an obvious advantage}) 12. O-O O-O-O 13. Be5 Bxd6 14. Qxg7 {.})
9. e6 $1 {Otherwise ...e7-e6.} fxe6 10. Bd3 {(3)} Ngf6 11. Qe2 {(2) For the
moment Black's extra pawn is only hindering his development, and it is
obviously doomed.} g6 {A sensible move.} ({The attempt} 11... Qb6 12. O-O-O
O-O-O {(?)} 13. Qxe6 Qxd4 {(?) would be refuted by the pretty but routine
stroke} 14. Qxc6+ $1 bxc6 15. Ba6# {.}) 12. Qxe6 Bg7 13. O-O $6 {(2) A
questionable and rather flippant decision - White thinks that all roads lead
to Rome. I judged that the opponent's defences would not be cracked by crude
pressure on the e-file, I was outlining a pawn offensive on the queenside, and
therefore I hid my king on the opposite wing.} ({However,} 13. O-O-O $1 {was
both more logical, and stronger - after} Nh5 14. Bg5 {(h2) White would have
retained an obvious advantage.}) 13... Nh5 14. Bg5 $2 {(5) When I played 13
0-0 I was intending this active bishop move, assuming, mainly on general
grounds, that it would be difficult for Black to decide on 14...Bxd4.} ({Of
course, the pawn should have been defended -} 14. Be3 {, still with the better
chances.}) 14... Nf8 $2 {Lutikov took me 'at my word' and played this without
calculating the variations. But this is a serious mistake, leading to a
difficult position.} ({After the cool-headed} 14... Bxd4 $1 {Black could have
repelled the attack.} 15. -- ({. At the board I was naively hoping that in the
variation} 15. Nxd5 {(?)} cxd5 16. Bb5 -- (16... Nhf6 {(?)} 17. Rad1 {the
white rooks would find suitable employment on the central files}) ({, but in
home analysis I found} 16... a6 $5 17. Rae1 axb5 18. Bxe7 Qb6 19. Qxd5 Be5 $1 {
, when it is now White who has to display exceptional resourcefulness:} 20.
Rxe5 Nxe5 21. Bc5 $1 Qc6 22. Qxe5+ Kf7 23. Qe7+ Kg8 24. Rd1 Qe8 $1 25. Qxb7 {
with a mass of pawns for the rook and an unclear game.} (25. --)) ({. But
later it transpired that after} 16... Bf6 $1 {White does not have compensation
for the piece.})) ({. Obviously, instead of 15 Nxd5? the simple} 15. Rfe1 {is
correct, for example:} Bf6 16. Bxf6 Nhxf6 (16... Ndxf6 $2 17. g4) 17. Na4 {
with quite good play for the pawn, but - within the bounds of equality (} Rf8
18. c4 Rf7 {etc.).})) 15. Qg4 Nf6 ({Or} 15... Bf6 16. Rae1 {.}) 16. Qe2 Qd6 17.
Rae1 {(4) Black's forces are still scattered, his development is incomplete,
and the threat of trouble along the e-file has by no means disappeared. The
problem of deploying the rooks was solved very simply by White: after the pawn
advance f2-f4-f5 the opening of the f-file is very much a reality, and
therefore the rooks stand best at e1 and f1.} e6 {Black prevents the advance
of the white f-pawn, but at the same time he condemns himself to passive
defence, by denying himself the resource ...Ne6.} ({However,} 17... Kf7 18. Bh4
$1 Ne6 ({if} 18... Re8 {with the idea of 19 Bg3 Qb4, then} 19. Qe3 $1) 19. Bg3
Qd7 (19... Nxd4 $2 20. Qe3 Qb4 21. a3) 20. Be5 {looks dangerous for him -
f2-f4-f5 is threatened.}) 18. Na4 {(5) In this way White opens a second front
on the queenside, trying also there to create targets to attack.} (18. Qe3 $5 {
was also good, retaining various possibilities.}) 18... Kf7 19. b4 b6 ({Not} 
19... Qxb4 $2 20. Nc5 {.}) 20. Qd2 {(3)} Re8 ({In the event of} 20... N8d7 21.
Bf4 Qe7 22. Re3 Rhe8 23. Rfe1 {White would have combined pressure on the
e-file with the threat of opening the game on the queenside.}) 21. Bf4 {To
where should the queen move?} Qe7 ({In the event of} 21... Qd7 {, apart from
my earlier recommendation} 22. c4 {, White also has two other strong
possibilities:} ({the prophylactic} 22. Bh2 $5 {with the idea of} c5 23. Nc3 $1
) ({and the combinative} 22. b5 $5 cxb5 23. Nc3 a6 24. a4 b4 $1 25. Ne2 a5 26.
Bb5 {, winning the exchange, and then, most probably, also the game.})) 22. b5
(22. Re3 $5 {also suggests itself.}) 22... Qa3 {A difficult choice: at e7 the
queen was preventing the other black pieces from regrouping.} ({After} 22... c5
{I was planning} 23. dxc5 bxc5 24. c4 {, and if} d4 {, then} 25. Re2 {and Rfe1,
increasing the pressure.}) 23. Nc3 c5 24. Nb1 $1 {(2) The return home of the
knight is perhaps the strongest move in its career (a similar manoeuvre was
familiar to me from the Sicilian). It transpires that the black queen's sortie
to a3 has not prevented the opening of the centre.} Qa4 ({If} 24... Qb4 {, then
} 25. c3 $1 {is good;} ({but not} 25. Qxb4 $6 cxb4 26. Bd6 {, as given in 'The
Test of Time', because of} N6d7 $1 27. Bxb4 Bxd4) 25... Qa5 26. Qb2 {, and the
black queen suffers a sad fate}) ({while after} 24... Qxa2 $2 25. Nc3 {it is
altogether trapped.}) 25. dxc5 bxc5 26. c4 $1 {(of course!)} N8d7 (26... dxc4
$2 {is not possible because of} 27. Nc3) ({while after} 26... d4 27. Qe2 ({or} 
27. Bc7 {Black's queen is again incarcerated and his position is very
difficult.})) 27. Nc3 {(4)} Qa5 28. Qc2 ({The flamboyant} 28. Ne4 $5 Qxd2 29.
Ng5+ Kg8 30. Bxd2 {would have given an overwhelming advantage, but I did not
want to exchange the queens. White's problem is that he has many tempting
moves, but he still has to win the game, i.e. overcome certain difficulties.})
28... Qd8 {There is not now anything for the queen to do on its own wing.} (
28... e5 $2) ({or} 28... Nb6 $2 {was bad because of} 29. Bd2 $1) ({but} 28...
Rd8 {and ...Rhe8 deserved some consideration.}) 29. Bg5 {(13)} Nb6 30. a4 $1 {
(4)} dxc4 ({The threat of the a-pawn's further advance does not allow Black
time to regroup, e.g.} 30... Qc7 31. cxd5 exd5 ({or} 31... Nfxd5 32. Ne4 c4 33.
a5 cxd3 34. Qxc7+ Nxc7 35. Nd6+ {etc}) (31... Nbxd5 $2 32. Bc4 $1) 32. a5 Nbd7
33. Nxd5 Nxd5 34. Bc4 {.}) 31. Be4 Re7 ({If} 31... Rhf8 {the most decisive was
probably} 32. Bc6 $5 Qd3 33. Qc1 $1 Rd8 34. a5 Nbd5 35. Nxd5 {with the ideas
of Re3-f3 and b5-b6.}) 32. a5 {(4)} ({Here too} 32. Bc6 $5 {(} Qd3 33. Qc1 $1 {
) was good}) ({as well as} 32. Rd1 Rd7 33. Bc6) ({or} 32. Re3 {.}) 32... Nbd7
33. Bc6 {(8)} ({The solid} 33. Qa4 {was also possible, but I was already
looking for decisive continuations.}) 33... Nb8 ({The pawn capture} 33... Qxa5
{would have been suicidal in view of} 34. Ne4 (34. Re3 $5) 34... Nxe4 35. Bxe7
(35. Qxe4 {is also not bad}) 35... Nd2 36. Bg5 $1 Nxf1 37. Qd1 $1 {with
crushing threats.}) 34. Rd1 {(7)} ({Although} 34. Re3 Qxa5 $6 35. Rf3) ({or} 
34. Ne4 Qxa5 $6 35. Nd6+ {would also have been decisive, I continued playing
in my usual style. The pawn sacrifice was not essential, but it appealed to me!
}) 34... Qxa5 35. Ne4 Rf8 {At last the h8-rook has come into play, making way
for the king to go to g8. Black has acquired a real prospect of consolidating
his position, while White is restoring the material balance. But here I
noticed a drawback to the placing of the black rooks.} 36. Bf4 $1 {(11) Like
a pendulum, the white bishop has been oscillating throughout the game between
f4 and g5, each time further disrupting the opponent's defences. This last
oscillation makes Black's position critical. Since 36...e5? is not possible
because of 37 Qxc4+, he is forced to allow the invasion of the white pieces.} (
{Even now I am proud of the elegant bishop move, although the computer
suggests the 'inflexible'} 36. Nd6+ Kg8 37. Nxc4 Qc7 38. Rd6 Nbd7 ({or} 38...
Nxc6 39. bxc6) 39. Rfd1 Nb6 40. Be3 {and wins. The winning method chosen by me
is more human: there is no reason to drive the black king into a safe shelter.}
) 36... Nxc6 37. bxc6 Ne8 $6 {In defending the d6-square, Black allows a
tactical stroke.} (37... Nxe4 38. Qxe4 Rc8 {, was somewhat more resilient, but
here White would have concluded the fight by} ({not} 38... Bd4 39. Bd6) 39. Bg5
$1 Bf6 (39... Ree8 40. Rd7+ Kg8 41. Bd2 $1 {with the threat of Rxg7+}) 40. Bxf6
Kxf6 41. Qh4+ Kf7 42. Qxh7+ Kf6 43. Qh4+ Kf7 44. Rd6 ({or} 44. Rfe1 {, and the
heavy piece attack is irresistible.})) 38. Rd7 $1 {(5)} Rxd7 39. cxd7 Nf6 40.
Nd6+ (40. Ng5+ {and Qxc4 was more energetic.}) 40... Ke7 41. Nxc4 Qa6 42. Bd6+
Kxd7 43. Bxf8 (43. Qe2 $1 {(threatening Ne5+)} Qa4 {(b7)} 44. Bxf8 Bxf8 45. Re1
{would have won more quickly.}) 43... Bxf8 {Despite the nominal material
equality (two pawns for the exchange), Black's position is lost: it is
impossible for him to defend his king and preserve all his weak pawns.} 44.
Qd3+ (44. Rd1+ $5 {.}) 44... Ke7 (44... Nd5 $2 45. Ne5+) (44... Ke8 {(c7)} 45.
Rb1 {etc. is also insufficient.}) 45. Rd1 (45. Rb1 $5 {.}) 45... Nd5 46. Qe4
Kf7 (46... Nc3 $2 47. Qh4+ {.}) 47. Ne5+ Kg8 48. Nd7 $1 {An accurate move to
decide proceedings.} c4 49. Rb1 {(with an unavoidable invasion)} Qd6 50. Rb7 {
(2)} ({Black parries the threat of Rb8, and in passing he sets the 'trap'} 50.
Nxf8 Nc3 $5 (50... Kxf8 51. Qxc4 {is hopeless}) 51. Qa8 $1 {(into which White
could well have fallen)} Nxb1 52. Nxe6+ Kf7 53. Ng5+ Ke7 54. Qb7+ {and Qxb1,
winning. But since, in the heat of the battle, we had rushed past the time
control, and neither of us was taking the initiative in adjourning the game, I
followed another path, planned beforehand, where it was the activity of the
rook that nevertheless decided matters.}) 50... c3 51. Nxf8 Kxf8 52. Rxh7 Qf4 {
By the threat of perpetual check Black exchanges the queens and saves himself
from a mating attack, but not from defeat.} 53. Qxf4+ (53. Qb1 Nb4 54. g3 c2
55. Qxc2 $1 {was also good.}) 53... Nxf4 54. Kf1 a5 55. Ra7 Nd5 56. Rxa5 Kf7 ({
With a final trap -} 56... Kf7 57. Ke2 Nf4+ 58. Kf3 $4 c2 59. Rc5 Nd3 $1 60.
Rxc2 Ne1+ {, and it is Black who wins, but...}) 57. g3 {. Times: 2.07-2.29.
--- This first tournament win over a grandmaster also brought me my first
triumph in adult chess. By confidently taking first place in a strong field
and surpassing the master norm by 3½ points, I also reached a new level in
public perception. As Botvinnik commented, this was the greatest success ever
achieved by such a young player in the Soviet Union! The newspapers began
writing about me, many chess fans took an interest in my play, and I acquired
an army of supporters. Not for nothing did the chairman of the Belorussian
Chess Federation state at the closing ceremony: 'We hope that Kasparov will
return here, in order to get even with Mochalov and Dydyshko!'} (57. -- {From
the newspaper Sovietsky sport: 'The eighth Sokolsky Memorial was a particular
success. The fighting intensity was unusually high: out of 153 games, only 60
ended in a draw. The hero of the tournament was the USSR junior champion Garik
Kasparov from Baku. As it turned out, it was not the masters who tested the
schoolboy, but the schoolboy who gave lessons to the masters! In his play one
senses the influence of ex-champion Botvinnik, who already for several years
has been advising the young player from Baku.' --- At that same time, on the
eve of the Karpov-Korchnoi world championship match (Baguio 1978), the
newspaper Sotsialisticheskaya industriya [Socialist Industry] wrote: 'Karpov
has every reason to hope for a favourable outcome to this encounter. But some
time will pass, and he will have to battle against new challengers. Who are
they? It is probable that the dangerous rivals to the present world champion
are among those who today are 15-16 years old... Some three years ago a
talented young player from Baku, Garry Kasparov, first drew attention. Two
years running he won the title of USSR junior champion. "In the hands of such
youths is the future of chess", Botvinnik spoke about his pupil. Very recently
an important landmark in Kasparov's career was reached - he became a master.
In the tournament table he had 13 points! The quality of his games is also
staggering.'}) (57. -- {Botvinnik: 'The fact that Garik may develop into a
world-class player is something I have been convinced about for a long time.
But the skill is to steer him towards this cautiously, by degrees. When we
were sure that he was capable of withstanding great stress, we decided to test
his capabilities in more serious tournaments. In Minsk he performed simply
excellently, demonstrating by his victory that he is quite ready to be
elevated to the master rank. He also had the moral right to this earlier, when
for the second successive time he won the junior championship of the country.
Now he has also gained the juridical right to this.' --- Valery Asriyan: 'In
January 1978 I began working for the Azerbaijan Information Agency and in the
performance of my duties I had far more frequent contact with Kasparov than
before. Precisely at that time the Sokolsky Memorial took place in Minsk.
Garik played brilliantly... I regularly phoned Minsk and, as soon as news of
Kasparov's success became known, I passed on the information to TASS under the
heading "The youngest master", since Garik had become the youngest chess
master in the world'.}) (57. -- {That is how this unforgettable tournament
concluded, for me a genuinely momentous one. Directly from Minsk I hastened to
the Botvinnik School, where my strict mentor offered words not only of
congratulation. At that same session Mikhail Moiseevich for the first time
invited me to be his assistant. I was filled with a feeling of pride - it
meant that I was already able in some way to help the great Botvinnik. ---
Nikitin: 'Garry reported back on his accomplishment, and at the same time, in
place of Dvoretsky, who had left the school, he performed the duties of
assistant - at a session where half of the pupils were older than him. I am
not sure that this was a pedagogically correct move by the ex-champion. To
push the self-assertion of the newly-fledged master was risky. However, the
teacher had conclusively broken off with his previous assistant and he decided
to show that he could also conduct lessons without him. Which he did. One
session, which, as it turned out, was the last one.' --- Unfortunately, the
school closed due to the removal of financial support, and its work was
renewed only eight years later, when I became world champion, now as the
'Botvinnik-Kasparov School'.}) 1-0

[Event "?"]
[Site "?"]
[Date "????.??.??"]
[Round "?"]
[White "Smile of Fortune"]
[Black "?"]
[Result "*"]
[Annotator "Garry Kasparov"]
[PlyCount "1"]
[EventDate "1984.??.??"]
[SourceDate "2009.12.07"]

{All-union Qualifying Tournament (Daugavpils, 27th June - 16th July 1978): 1.
Kasparov and 2. I.Ivanov - 9 out of 13; 3-7. Kupreichik, Mikhalchishin,
Kapengut and Tseshkovsky - 8½; 8-13. Alburt, Makarychev, Dolmatov,
Rashkovsky, Lerner and Palatnik - 8 etc. (altogether - 64 participants,
including 7 grandmasters, 9 international masters and 42 masters).} 1. -- {
After my victory in Minsk, some said that the tournament was not a significant
one, whereas coming up in the summer was the all-union qualifier for the next
men's USSR Championship - that would indeed be a serious test! I gained the
right to play in it thanks to my successes in junior events. The tournament
was held on the currently fashionable Swiss system, then very rare in
high-level competitions, which allows qualifiers to be quickly selected from a
large number of contestants. Here there were 64, and only the winner would go
through directly into the Premier League, while the next six would have to
play again in the First League. So that for everyone there were seven
qualifying places, plus one or two reserve places, and no cash prizes! ---
Botvinnik very much disliked Swiss tournaments and thought that it was harmful
for me to play in such 'lotteries': it is difficult to prepare beforehand (it
is not known who you will be paired against), and express preparation before
games is chaotic. The maestro said to Nikitin: 'Neither I, nor your beloved
Fischer played in such tournaments, but this did not prevent us becoming world
champions'. Botvinnik even suggested to the Sports Committee that they should
make a 'castling' move - send me instead of Artur Yusupov to the Amsterdam IBM
'B' Tournament with a grandmaster norm, and, by contrast, include Yusupov in
the all-union qualifying tournament (although Artur, as world junior champion,
already had the right to play in the First League!). Fortunately, this did not
happen... --- In the end Botvinnik reconciled himself to my participation in
the unusually strong Swiss tournament, which was to start at the end of June
in the Latvian town of Daugavpils. It was my mother who persuaded him to
'forgo his principles'; in the words of Nikitin, 'her diplomatic skill had an
irresistible effect on Mikhail Moiseevich'. After this the Teacher severely
asked me whether I was hoping to finish among the leading places in Daugavpils.
I gave a vague reply. Then he said that with such a mood there was no point in
going to the tournament, which was to be held on the Swiss system and would be
ineffective as a training event.} (1. -- {Well, the audacious thought of
qualifying for the First League did occur to me, of course. I prepared very
thoroughly with Nikitin and Shakarov: we worked a great deal on both the
opening and the endgame, we studied the origin of my mistakes, and we also
tried to solve psychological problems. Before the tournament I was in a
fighting mood and I sensed that I was capable of a new qualitative leap. Now I
was no longer a 'dark horse', as in Minsk, and the other players were rather
wary of me, but the line-up of the qualifying tournament in Daugavpils was far
more impressive: the most promising young players and some fifteen chess
die-hards, battle-hardened in high-level battles. Therefore initially my
trainers set me a comparatively modest objective - to score 'plus two', and in
the first half of the tournament I played quietly. --- At the start I was
paired against the talented 24-year old Chelyabinsk player Alexander Panchenko,
the USSR young masters champion, who was soon to become a grandmaster and
later a well-known trainer and the author of some substantial chess books (see
the following game).}) *

[Event "25: All-Union Qualifier, Daugavpils"]
[Site "?"]
[Date "1978.06.28"]
[Round "1"]
[White "Kasparov, G."]
[Black "Panchenko, A."]
[Result "1-0"]
[ECO "B67"]
[Annotator "Garry Kasparov"]
[PlyCount "69"]
[EventDate "1978.??.??"]
[Source "Everyman Chess"]
[SourceDate "2012.11.28"]

1. e4 {At that time this was my main move - I was only just becoming
accustomed to 1 d4.} c5 2. Nf3 Nc6 3. d4 cxd4 4. Nxd4 Nf6 5. Nc3 d6 ({One of
Panchenko's favourite set-ups, along with the Chelyabinsk Variation (} 5... e5
{).}) 6. Bg5 e6 7. Qd2 a6 8. O-O-O Bd7 9. f4 (9. f3 {was also fashionable, but
I didn't play that.}) 9... b5 10. Nxc6 {(7)} ({Nowadays the main line is} 10.
Bxf6 gxf6 {.}) 10... Bxc6 11. Bd3 {(6) Natural development;} ({although} 11.
Qe3 {(e1) has also been employed.}) 11... Be7 12. e5 (12. Qe1 Nd7 $1 {is
ineffective for White (Browne-Tukmakov, Hastings 1972/73; Mecking-Polugayevsky,
6th match game, Lucerne 1977)}) ({while after} 12. Rhe1 O-O 13. e5 dxe5 14. Qf2
{there is an interesting queen sacrifice -} h6 $5 {(Karpov-Tal, 44th USSR
Championship, Moscow 1976).}) 12... dxe5 13. fxe5 Nd7 ({(White has more
chances after} 13... Nd5 14. Bxe7 Qxe7 15. Ne4 {, J.Polgar-Dreev, Linares 1997)
}) 14. Bxe7 Qxe7 15. Be4 $5 {An old sacrifice of the central pawn. --- This
novelty was still awaiting its hour, but Panchenko had also prepared something:
he decided to 'treat himself' to the e5-pawn, relying on his resourcefulness
in defence.} (15. Qf4 Nc5 16. Ne4 Bxe4 17. Bxe4 Rc8 {is too harmless 
(Mecking-Polugayevsky, 8th match game, Lucerne 1977).}) ({Both players had
aimed for this position, having in mind the game Kasparov-Yermolinsky 
(Leningrad 1977), where after the cautious} 15. Be4 Qc5 $5 16. Rhe1 Ra7 $6 (
16... Rc8 $1 {has also been analysed}) 17. -- (17. Bxc6 $6 Qxc6 {Black easily
solved his opening problems.}) ({. But in a 'debriefing' at home I had found
an improvement -} 17. b4 $1 {. This looks risky (the king is exposed), but it
creates unpleasant pressure:} Qb6 (17... Qc4 $2 18. Qe3) 18. Qd6 ({or} 18. Qf4
O-O 19. Rd6 {etc.}) ({but not} 18. Qg5 $6 O-O 19. Rd6 Qf2 $1 {with equality,
Salov-Yermolinsky, Yurmala 1983.}))) 15... Bxe4 (15... Rc8 $6 16. Bxc6 Rxc6 17.
Ne4 Nxe5 {is weaker because of} 18. Nd6+ Kf8 19. Rhe1 $1 {with an enduring
initiative for White:} f6 ({if} 19... Ng6 $2 20. Nf5 $1) ({while if} 19... Nc4
{, then} 20. Nxc4 bxc4 21. Qd8+ Qe8 22. Rd6 $5) 20. Nxb5 $1 axb5 21. Rxe5 $1
fxe5 22. Qd8+ Qxd8 23. Rxd8+ Kf7 24. Rxh8 Kg6 ({or} 24... Rd6 25. Rxh7 e4 26.
Rh4 $1) 25. Rb8 Rc5 26. Kd2 {(Sax-Kozul, Radenci 1998).}) ({But the pawn could
have been taken immediately -} 15... Nxe5 {.} 16. -- ({. After this there
would not have followed} 16. Bxc6+ $2 Nxc6 17. Nd5 Qb7 $1 {(Khasin-Taimanov,
23rd USSR Championship, Leningrad 1956)}) ({, and not} 16. Qf4 Bxe4 $1 17. Qxe5
Bg6 18. Qxg7 Qg5+ (18... Qf8 {has also been played}) 19. Rd2 Ke7 20. h4 Qe3 21.
Rh3 Qf4 (21... Qg1+ $2 22. Rd1 {, Solak-Ivanesevic, Petrovac 2004}) 22. Rf3
Rhg8 $1 {with equality}) ({, but most probably} 16. Qd4 $1 -- ({, since} 16...
Qg5+ $2 17. Kb1 Rd8 18. Qc5 {(Gligoric)} (18. --)) (16... Qc7 $2 17. Bxc6+ Nxc6
18. Qxg7) ({, and} 16... f6 $2 17. Qxe5 $1 fxe5 18. Bxc6+ Kf7 19. Rd7 {are all
bad for Black}) ({, all that remains for him is} 16... Bxe4 17. Nxe4 {,
transposing into a position from the game.}))) 16. Nxe4 Nxe5 {Here I thought
for a long time - this line was unknown to me. It is clear that White has
excellent compensation for the pawn: the black king will be prevented from
castling and for a long time the rook at h8 will be shut in the corner.
However, it is necessary to act energetically.} 17. Qd4 {(22)} (17. Qc3 {is
also interesting:} f6 18. Nd6+ Kf8 19. Rd4 g6 {weakening the f6-point;} ({
according to Stohl,} 19... h6 20. Nc8 Qe8 21. Nd6 Qe7) ({or} 19... h5 $5 {is
safer}) 20. Nc8 {(Sutovsky-Blehm, Ohrid 2001), but after Gofshtein's suggestion
} Qb7 $1 21. Rf4 Kg7 22. Rxf6 Nd3+ $1 23. Qxd3 Qxg2 {Black holds on.}) 17... f6
18. Nd6+ Kf8 19. Rhf1 {(6)} ({After} 19. Rhe1 {Black has time to make a 'vent
hole' for his rook -} h5 $1 20. a4 h4 21. h3 Rh5 {with good play 
(Aseev-Yermolinsky, Vilnius 1984).}) 19... Kg8 ({One does not want to move the
knight from its strong position at e5, but nevertheless} 19... Nf7 20. Qb6 (20.
Qe4 $6 Rd8) (20. Ne4 Rc8 $1) 20... Nxd6 (20... Rd8 $2 21. Ne4 $1) 21. Rxd6 Kf7
{was playable, releasing the rook at h8 from imprisonment:} 22. -- (22. Rfd1
Rhb8 23. Qd4 Rb7) ({, or} 22. Re1 e5 {, and here in 'Informator' Gufeld
recommended} ({bolder than} 22... Rhb8 $6 23. Rdxe6 Qd7 {, Ad.Horvath-Gonda,
Budapest 2002}) 23. Qc6 {(?!) with a '+/-' sign,} (23. Red1 Rhb8 24. Qc6 Kg8
25. Rd7 Qb4 26. b3 {is correct, with approximate equality}) 23... Rhc8 $1 {,
but after} 24. Qd5+ Kf8 {it is White who has problems.})) {After the game
continuation White's compensation for the sacrificed pawn is also sufficient
only to maintain a dynamic equilibrium.} 20. g4 $1 {(15) Beginning a direct
attack on the king - g4-g5 is threatened (undermining the support of the
knight at e5!), and at the same time the freeing move ...h7-h5 is prevented.
However, for the moment Black's difficulties are largely of a psychological
nature (the unresolved problem of the rook on h8 is unnerving).} h6 {Panchenko
halts the g4-pawn and prepares the evacuation of his king, believing in the
soundness of his defences.} ({If} 20... Nf7 {there is the resource} 21. Qe4 $1
Rb8 ({after} 21... Rd8 $2 22. Nf5 $1 {Black's lack of an escape square is felt}
) 22. Nf5 $1 {, and although after} Qe8 {nothing terrible is yet apparent,
White retains the initiative.}) 21. h4 {(4) Insisting on the further advance
of the g-pawn. Meanwhile, this menacing pawn storm also has an important
drawback: in the event of g4-g5 and ...h6xg5 the h-file is opened and the
imprisoned rook at h8 breaks free!} Nf7 $6 {Perturbed by the bold aggression
of his young opponent, Panchenko decided to play 'solidly' - to get rid of the
annoying knight on d6.} (21... Rd8 $6 {was insufficient in view of} 22. Nf5 $1
Rxd4 23. Nxe7+ Kf7 24. Rxd4 Kxe7 25. h5 {etc.}) ({But Black had better ways of
defending:} 21... Qc7 22. -- ({, and if} 22. g5 {, then} hxg5 23. hxg5 Rh2 $1
24. c3 Qc6 $5 (24... b4 {will also do}) 25. Qg1 $1 ({but not} 25. gxf6 $2 Qg2
$1 26. Qd2 Nd3+ $1) ({or} 25. Rg1 Qf3 $1 26. Ne4 (26. gxf6 $2 Qe2 $1) 26... f5)
25... Rg2 26. Qe3 Rxg5 {, and after} 27. Qh3 {White still has to demonstrate
that his attack compensates for the material given up.}) ({. He can also play
for a bind by} 22. Rfe1 Rd8 23. h5 {and if} Qc6 {sacrifice the exchange -} 24.
Rxe5 fxe5 25. Qxe5 {, but, although the rook at h8 is offside, he does not
have the forces for a successful offensive})) (21... Rf8 22. -- ({, when} 22.
h5 Qc7 23. Rfe1 (23. Rf2 Qc6 $1 {and ...Kh7}) 23... Nf3 24. Qe3 Nxe1 25. Qxe6+
Kh7 26. Qf5+ {gives only perpetual check}) ({, while in the event of the
cautious} 22. g5 hxg5 23. hxg5 Rh5 $1 ({Gufeld's move} 23... Ng6 {is weaker
because of} 24. gxf6 Rxf6 25. Kb1) 24. Ne4 (24. gxf6 Rxf6 $1) 24... Ng4 25.
gxf6 Nxf6 {Black escapes from all his problems.})) 22. Qe4 $1 {(8) This
strong interposition, creating the threat of Nf5, was probably overlooked by
Panchenko - at any event, he became rattled and was unable to find the correct
reply.} Rf8 $2 {A serious mistake, if not the decisive one. Paradoxically,
just a move ago Black would have equalised with this move, whereas now it puts
him in a very difficult position.} ({The defence could still have been held by
exchanging a pair of rooks and returning the extra pawn:} 22... Rd8 $1 23. Nf5
Rxd1+ 24. Rxd1 Qc7 $1 (24... Qe8 {is less good in view of} 25. Nd4) 25. Qxe6
Kh7 26. Rd4 Rd8 27. Qe4 Rxd4 28. Nxd4+ Kg8 29. Nc6 Kf8 {, and White's
advantage has almost evaporated.}) 23. Nf5 $1 {(23)} Qe8 ({Now it is bad to
play} 23... Qc7 $2 24. Qxe6 Qe5 (24... Kh7 25. Nxg7 $1) 25. Qxa6 Kh7 26. Rde1 {
and wins.}) 24. Nd4 $1 {(3) The white pieces have suddenly developed such
activity that it is difficult for the opponent to avoid the creation of new
weaknesses in his pawn formation. It is already hard to offer Black any good
advice - both his rooks are miserably placed.} e5 $6 {An irreparable weakening
of the f5-point. But what instead?} ({Black's defence is very difficult after} 
24... Ne5 25. g5 hxg5 26. hxg5 -- (26... Rh7 $2 27. gxf6 $1 gxf6 28. Rg1+) ({
, or} 26... Rh5 $6 27. gxf6 Rxf6 28. Rxf6 gxf6 29. Qb7 $1 {is bad for him}) ({
, while after} 26... Qg6 27. Qxg6 Nxg6 28. Nxe6 Re8 29. Rd6 $1 ({or} 29. gxf6
$5 {(Gufeld)} Rxe6 30. f7+ Kh7 31. Rh1+ Nh4 32. Rxh4+ Rh6 33. Rf4 Rf8 34. Rf2)
29... fxg5 30. Nxg5 Ne5 31. Rxa6 {White has an endgame with an extra pawn and
winning prospects}) (26... Qa8 $1 {is more resilient} 27. -- ({, although here
too White can transpose into a better ending -} 27. Qxa8 Rxa8 28. gxf6 Rh6 $5
29. fxg7 Kxg7 30. Rde1 $1 {(with the idea of} Rd8 31. Nxb5 Nd3+ 32. cxd3 axb5
33. Re5 {, etc.)}) ({, or continue the attack -} 27. Qe2 Qc8 28. gxf6 gxf6 29.
Qe4 {, which, however, after} Rh7 (29... Qa8 $2 30. Qe3) 30. Rg1+ Rg7 31. Rxg7+
Kxg7 32. Rg1+ Kf7 33. Qh7+ Ke8 34. Rg7 Nf7 35. Qe4 Qc4 36. b3 Qd5 37. Qxe6+
Qxe6 38. Nxe6 Rh8 39. Nc7+ Kf8 40. Rg2 {and Nxa6 also leads to an endgame with
an extra pawn.}))) ({'} 24... Nd8 {was perhaps preferable' (Abr. Khasin).
However, it is unclear how Black can extricate himself from the vice after} 25.
h5 {: if} Rf7 $6 {there is the decisive} 26. Nf5 $1 Rd7 27. Nh4 {and Ng6.}) 25.
Nf5 {Now, although Black has retained his extra pawn, he will die from
suffocation.} h5 $6 {A desperate attempt, which could have proved successful
only in the event of an obvious mistake by White.} (25... g6 $4 26. Ne7+ $1
Qxe7 27. Qxg6# {would have led to a pretty epaulette mate}) ({but the patient} 
25... Qe6 {also offered little chance of saving the game:} 26. b3 Rh7 (26...
Re8 27. Rf3 $1) 27. Qb7 Kh8 ({or} 27... g6 28. Ne7+ Kg7 29. h5 gxh5 30. gxh5
Re8 31. Nd5) 28. h5 Qc8 29. Qa7 {and wins.}) 26. Rg1 $6 {(5) Intending to
attack along the g-file.} ({However, I had two forcing ways to win immediately:
} 26. g5 $1 fxg5 27. hxg5 Nxg5 ({after} 27... g6 $4 28. Ne7+ {it is again mate}
) 28. Rg1 $1 (28. Qe3 $5) 28... Ne6 29. Qxe5 Rxf5 {(there is nothing else)} 30.
Qxf5 Qf7 31. Qe5 Qf4+ 32. Qxf4 Nxf4 33. Rd8+ Kh7 34. Rxh8+ Kxh8 35. Kd2 {, and
the rook quickly deals with the knight}) (26. Qb7 $1 {(with the threats of
Ne7+ and Rd7)} Qa8 (26... Kh7 27. gxh5 $1) 27. Qd7 Rd8 28. Ne7+ Kf8 29. Qc7 Rh6
30. Nc6 {(f5), and Black has no defence.}) 26... Rh7 (26... Nh6 $2 27. Nxg7 $1
{.}) 27. Qb7 $2 {(12)} ({Alas, if} 27. g5 fxg5 28. hxg5 {there is now} g6 29.
Nh4 Nh8 $1 {(Gufeld)} 30. Rd6 Rhf7 {, and Black defends.}) ({But a strong
attack would have been retained by both} 27. Qb4 $5 g5 28. gxh5 Rxh5 29. Kb1) (
{and} 27. gxh5 $5 Nh6 28. Nd6 Qxh5 29. Rdf1 Nf7 30. Nf5 {etc.}) 27... Kh8 $2 {
But this loses.} (27... Nd8 {was essential, with the ideas of} 28. Qxa6 ({or} 
28. Qd5+ Kh8) 28... hxg4 {.}) 28. gxh5 {(5)} Qe6 ({Of course, not} 28... Nd8 $2
29. Rxd8 $1 Qxd8 30. Rxg7 Rxh5 31. Rg5 $1 {and wins (Abr. Khasin).}) 29. Nxg7
$1 {(6) This is what Panchenko overlooked!} ({He was probably expecting} 29.
Ne7 Re8 30. Ng6+ Kg8 {, although here too after} 31. Kb1 $1 {White has a big
advantage.}) 29... Qxa2 $6 {Desperation.} ({True, a more resilient defence
would also not have saved Black:} 29... Qc4 30. Qe7 $1 ({this is more forceful
than Gufeld's suggestion} 30. Kb1) 30... Rc8 31. Kb1 $1 Qxc2+ (31... Rxg7 $6
32. Qxf6 Qxc2+ 33. Ka1 Qh7 34. Rg6 $1) 32. Ka1 Qc7 33. Nf5 $1 Qxe7 34. Nxe7 Re8
35. Ng6+ Kg8 {(comparatively best)} 36. Nxe5+ Rg7 37. Nd7 Re6 38. Rgf1 {with a
won endgame}) (29... Rxg7 30. Rxg7 Kxg7 31. Qg2+ $1 ({but not} 31. Rg1+ $2 Kh7
$1 {, when after} 32. Qg2 Ng5 33. hxg5 fxg5 34. Qxg5 {Black has} Qh6 $1) 31...
Ng5 (31... Kh7 $2 32. Qg6+ {and Rg1}) 32. hxg5 fxg5 33. Qxg5+ Kh7 34. Qg2 ({or
} 34. Kb1 {- thanks to his extra pawn and the open position of the enemy king,
White must win.})) 30. Qe7 $1 Rg8 31. Qxf6 Qa1+ (31... Rgxg7 32. Rxg7 Rxg7 33.
h6 {.}) 32. Kd2 Qa5+ 33. Ke2 Rgxg7 34. Rxg7 Rxg7 35. Rg1 {. Times: 2.20-2.29.
--- This crushing win over a high-class opponent inspired me, but the very
next day there followed a cold shower: in my favourite Caro-Kann I was unable
to make a draw with Ratmir Kholmov - the experienced grandmaster gave me an
excellent lesson in positional play. However, I was not too upset and in the
3rd round I again moved onto a plus score by defeating Rostislav Korsunsky in
a crucial 'Baku duel'.} 1-0

[Event "26: All-Union Qualifier, Daugavpils"]
[Site "?"]
[Date "1978.07.01"]
[Round "4"]
[White "Nikolaevsky, Yu"]
[Black "Kasparov, G."]
[Result "1/2-1/2"]
[ECO "E60"]
[Annotator "Garry Kasparov"]
[PlyCount "61"]
[EventDate "1978.??.??"]
[Source "Everyman Chess"]
[SourceDate "2012.11.28"]

{Now I had to hold out with Black, especially since in the 4th round I
encountered an opponent to whom two years earlier I had lost ignominiously in
Baku - the Kiev player Yuri Nikolaevsky, a three-time Ukrainian champion and a
finalist in three USSR Championships.} 1. Nf3 Nf6 2. b3 ({Our previous game 
(Baku 1976) went} 2. g3 g6 3. Bg2 Bg7 4. O-O O-O 5. d4 d6 6. b3 c5 7. Bb2 Nc6
8. d5 {. On this occasion Nikolaevsky began with 2 b3, but I was now aiming
not for ...c7-c5, but for a thematic King's Indian set-up with ...Nbd7 and ...e7-e5.}) 2... g6 3. Bb2 Bg7 4. c4 ({The usual} 4. g3 O-O (4... c5 {- Game No.44
}) 5. Bg2 d6 6. d4 {is nevertheless more accurate, and in the event of} Nbd7 7.
O-O e5 8. dxe5 {Black has to play} Ng4 {, after which it is no longer
favourable for him to capture on e5 with the pawn, while after the capture
with a piece White retains some pressure in the centre.}) 4... O-O 5. g3 d6 6.
d4 Nbd7 7. Bg2 e5 {Solving Black's opening problems.} 8. e3 ({If} 8. dxe5 {,
then simply} dxe5 $1 9. O-O ({the pawn is taboo:} 9. Nxe5 $2 Ng4 10. Nd3 $2
Bxb2 11. Nxb2 Qf6 $1 {and wins}) 9... e4 10. Ne1 Qe7 {and ...Rd8 with an
excellent game (Eliskases-Pachman, Mar del Plata 1962).}) ({And if} 8. O-O {,
then both} exd4 ({and} 8... e4 9. Ne1 d5 $5 10. Nc3 Nb6 {(Petrovs-Boleslavsky,
Moscow 1940) are good. Therefore for the moment White chooses to reinforce his
d4-pawn.})) 8... Re8 {(6)} 9. O-O e4 {Aggression in the spirit of the then
fashionable King's Indian Attack (cf. Game No.9), which demands precise
follow-up action.} ({To maintain the balance it was quite sufficient to play} 
9... Ne4) ({or} 9... exd4 $5 10. exd4 ({after} 10. Nxd4 Nc5 {the move e2-e3 is
depreciated}) 10... Ne4 $1 11. Nbd2 Ndf6 {, analogous to the way that I
earlier played in a clock simultaneous against Katalymov (Leningrad 1975).})
10. Nfd2 Nf8 {A typical manoeuvre with the attacking idea ...Bf5, ...h7-h5, ...N8h7-g5 and so on.} ({However,} 10... c6 $1 {was more natural - after
reinforcing his e4-pawn by ...d6-d5, Black would have retained a solid and
comfortable position.}) 11. Nc3 Bf5 12. f3 $1 {I underestimated this
undermining move. The experienced master immediately eliminates the threatened
bind on the kingside.} ({After} 12. Qc2 Qe7 ({or} 12... c6 {this can no longer
be played!})) 12... exf3 $6 {(2)} ({Black could still have retained more or
less equal chances, if he had found the by no means obvious tactic} 12... Bh6
$1 {, exploiting the momentary weakness of the e3-pawn:} 13. Ndxe4 (13. f4 Bg7
$1) 13... Bxe3+ 14. Kh1 N8d7 15. Re1 (15. g4 Bxe4 16. fxe4 c6 $1) 15... Bh6 16.
f4 Nxe4 17. Nxe4 Bg7 18. Qd2 d5 $1 {, and no advantage is given by either} 19.
cxd5 ({or} 19. Nc3 Rxe1+ 20. Rxe1 dxc4 21. Nd5 Be6 $1) 19... Bxe4 20. Bxe4 (20.
Rxe4 Rxe4 {and ...Nf6}) 20... Nf6 21. Bf3 Rxe1+ 22. Rxe1 Nxd5 {.}) 13. Qxf3 c6
14. e4 {After his modestly played opening White has unexpectedly made a strong
claim to an advantage - he has seized space, created a powerful pawn centre,
and opened the f-file, along which he can press on the f7-pawn. Black still
has sufficient defensive resources, but the sharp change of situation on the
board almost led me to disaster.} Bg4 $1 {With gain of tempo.} (14... Be6 15.
Rae1) ({or} 14... Bd7 15. Na4 Qe7 16. Rae1 {would have been worse.}) 15. Qf2
Qa5 $2 {(23) This queen sortie, which has the psychological intention of
frightening the opponent with the variation 16 h3 Qh5, proves to be a losing
move.} ({The knight should have been urgently activated -} 15... Ne6 $1 {, for
example:} 16. Na4 ({or} 16. h3 Ng5 $1 17. hxg4 Nxg4 18. Qe2 Bxd4+ 19. Kh1 Ne3)
16... Ng5 17. d5 Nfxe4 $5 (17... Nd7 {is also not bad}) 18. Nxe4 Rxe4 19. Bxg7
Kxg7 {with double-edged play.}) 16. c5 $2 {My reckoning proves justified!} ({
In fact after} 16. h3 $1 -- ({, Black did not have the reply} 16... Qh5 $2 {
because of the sudden blow} 17. e5 $1 dxe5 18. Nce4 {, winning a piece.} (18.
--)) (16... Bd7 {(c8)} 17. c5 $1) ({, or} 16... Be6 17. d5 $1 {would also have
been fatal}) ({, while after} 16... Qc7 {again} 17. d5 $1 {is strong, and if}
Bc8 {(h5), then} 18. Nb5 $1 {and Bxf6.}) ({. Nikolaevsky (following me) did
not notice the refutation of} 16... Qh5 {and was relying on a rapid
breakthrough in the centre. But he did not take account of all the tactical
nuances! Whereas from the 10th to the 15th move I played uncertainly, here I
literally gained a new lease of life, and I suddenly saw one of the longest
combinations in my career.})) 16... Be6 $1 {(5) Strictly the only move, which
was clearly underestimated by my opponent. Black defends the f7-pawn in good
time and creates the threat of ...Ng4, not allowing White to capture the
d6-pawn.} 17. h3 {White is forced to waste a tempo.} ({The attempt} 17. Nc4
Bxc4 18. bxc4 dxc5 19. e5 {is no better on account of} Ng4 $1 20. Qxf7+ Kh8 21.
Ne4 cxd4 22. Bxd4 Bxe5 23. Bxe5+ Qxe5 {with equality.}) 17... dxc5 {(8)} 18. e5
{After playing 18 e5, Nikolaevsky looked very happy with his position. But
within five moves the expression on his face changed...} (18. d5 $6 {is risky
in view of} Ng4 $1 19. Qf4 (19. hxg4 Bd4) 19... Bd4+ 20. Kh1 Ne5 $1 21. dxe6
Nxe6 22. Qf6 Rad8 {with excellent compensation for the piece.}) 18... cxd4 $1 {
(16) It is interesting that this entire chain of moves by Black, from the
16th to the end of the game, came to my mind somehow immediately, without any
particular effort.} (18... Nd5 {(or 18...N6d7) was also acceptable, but I
wanted to demonstrate the elegant way to draw that I had found.}) 19. exf6 Bh6
$1 ({Of course, not} 19... dxc3 $2 20. fxg7 Nd7 21. Nc4 {.}) 20. Qxd4 Rad8 21.
Nc4 $1 {This move was also made with obvious pleasure by Nikolaevsky ('the
young man has probably missed something'), but I replied equally confidently
and quickly.} Bxc4 22. Qxc4 Qb6+ {(3)} (22... Rd2 {is also highly rated by the
computer, but humans don't play that way.}) 23. Kh1 Rd4 $1 {The crux of the
entire idea. To save his queen, White has to allow the invasion of the 2nd
rank by both enemy rooks. By his own admission, my opponent was staggered,
when it transpired that in the complicated middlegame position after 16 c5
there was a forced draw!} 24. Na4 (24. Nd5 Rxc4 {would have come to the same
thing.}) 24... Rxc4 25. Nxb6 Rc2 26. Nc4 Ree2 {(4)} 27. Bf3 Rh2+ 28. Kg1 b5 29.
Be4 ({Or} 29. Bc1 Rxh3 30. Bxh6 Rxg3+ 31. Kh1 Rh3+ {.}) 29... Rce2 30. Bf3 Rc2
31. Be4 {. Draw agreed in view of 'perpetual check' to the rook. --- Times: 2.05-2.07.} (31. -- {A fairy-tale combination! The tournament spectators and
contestants, who observed the kaleidoscopic finish to the game, merely nodded
their heads: 'This youth is indeed very dangerous'. The most important result
of this sharp tactical skirmish was that I gained complete confidence in
myself. --- Nikitin: 'Before Daugavpils it was not difficult to convince Garik
that during the tournament he should play, rather than sit reading reference
books and wisdom-filled notebooks. And our preparation for games took place in
unhurried conversations during strolls through parks or streets, while the
specific opening system to be adopted was decided during dinner, a couple of
hours before the start of play. Naturally, such a method was effective only
after thorough preparatory work...'}) (31. -- {In the 5th round I defeated
Smbat Lputian, an old opponent in junior battles, and in the 6th round, with
Black in a Caro-Kann, I beat the experienced Mark Tseitlin, a genuine chess
filibuster: over-rating his chances, he avoided a three-fold repetition of the
position and in time-trouble went down in flames. Regarding this it was
written that 'the 15-year-old schoolboy managed to win a very interesting
psychological duel'. --- Rather unexpectedly I found myself among the leaders:
Palatnik - 5 out of 6, Kasparov, Alburt and Faibisovich - 4½. And I became
nervous when for the first time I saw my result highlighted in red in the
tournament table. The original 'plus two' target would have brought me
somewhere in the region of 15-20th place, but now Nikitin corrected his
initial plan: I had to try and cling on to a place in the top seven and
qualify for the First League!}) 1/2-1/2

[Event "27: All-Union Qualifier, Daugavpils"]
[Site "?"]
[Date "1978.07.05"]
[Round "7"]
[White "Kasparov, G."]
[Black "Palatnik, S."]
[Result "1-0"]
[ECO "B04"]
[Annotator "Garry Kasparov"]
[PlyCount "73"]
[EventDate "1978.??.??"]
[Source "Everyman Chess"]
[SourceDate "2012.11.28"]

{In the 7th round I was paired with White against the player half a point
ahead of me, Semion Palatnik from Odessa, who that year became a grandmaster.
Before the game with me he had scored four successive wins, but here, as they
say, he met his match. This competitively important game was judged to be one
of the best in the 26th volume of 'Informator'.} 1. e4 Nf6 2. e5 Nd5 3. d4 d6
4. Nf3 g6 (4... Bg4 {- Game No.8.}) 5. Bc4 Nb6 6. Bb3 a5 {This set-up was
often employed by Odessa players, and it was not hard for me and Nikitin to
prepare a good continuation.} ({After} 6... Bg7 {they usually played (and
still play)} 7. Ng5 ({but} 7. a4 a5 {has also occurred, i.e. the inclusion of
these moves was initiated by White!}) 7... e6 8. Qf3 {.}) 7. a4 ({Although
theory judged} 7. e6 Bxe6 8. Bxe6 fxe6 9. Ng5 Nc6 10. Nxe6 Qd7 11. Qe2 {to be
in White's favour, after} Nd8 12. Nxf8 Rxf8 {Black achieves a viable position 
(Kapengut-Palatnik and Lukin-Alburt, Beltsy 1977).}) 7... Bg7 ({I would have
been only too pleased with} 7... d5 8. O-O {(the source game: Kavalek-Larsen,
Manila 1973).}) 8. Ng5 ({Too little is promised by} 8. exd6 cxd6 {
(Ree-Palatnik, Kiev 1978).}) 8... e6 {This move, which had not occurred
previously, was made by Palatnik without any particular thought, which
somewhat threw me into confusion.} (8... d5 {would have led to a well-known
position with the inclusion of the moves a2-a4 and ...a7-a5. In the main
variation with} 9. f4 {the weakening of the b4-square (after the exchange of
c-pawns) may give Black counterplay.} ({However, I was planning} 9. O-O O-O 10.
Re1 ({more chances are given by} 10. Nc3 $5 {with the idea of} f6 $6 ({or} 
10... Nc6 11. Nb5) ({but Black can reply} 10... c6 {and then ...Na6-c7-e6}) 11.
Nge4 {, activating the knight}) 10... Nc6 11. c3 f6 12. exf6 exf6 13. Ne6 {
'with a slight advantage', which, alas, evaporates after} Bxe6 14. Rxe6 Qd7 {
and ...Rae8.})) 9. f4 {(20) A sensible plan of action - there was not a lot
of choice.} ({I quickly realised that it was not possible to refute Black's
idea immediately by} 9. Qf3 Qe7 10. Ne4 dxe5 (10... d5 $5) 11. Bg5 {because of}
Qb4+ $1 {- the inclusion of the moves a2-a4 and ...a7-a5 has denied White the
possibility of} 12. c3 {.} ({Later it seemed to me that} 12. Nbd2 {would
nevertheless give White a dangerous initiative:} -- (12... Qxd4 $2 13. Nf6+ Kf8
14. O-O-O) ({, or} 12... exd4 $6 13. c3 $1 {.}) ({. But after} 12... N8d7 $1 {
Black succeeds in consolidating -} 13. Nf6+ Nxf6 14. Bxf6 Bxf6 15. Qxf6 O-O 16.
Qxe5 (16. c3 Nd7 $1) 16... Nd7 17. Qe3 c5 18. dxc5 Qxc5 {with rapid equality.})
)) 9... dxe5 10. fxe5 {(14)} c5 11. O-O $1 {The strongest and most natural
move, although in earlier commentaries, fearing the reply 11...Qxd4 I consided
castling to be an inaccuracy and} ({since} 11. dxc5 Qxd1+ 12. Kxd1 N6d7 {is
harmless}) ({I recommended the 'simple'} 11. c3 cxd4 12. O-O $1 {- after} O-O
13. cxd4 Nc6 {the position is slightly better for White, and could have
occurred in the game (cf. the notes to Black's 12th).}) 11... O-O ({Palatnik
was right! In 'The Test of Time' I wrote that after} 11... Qxd4+ {(?)} 12. Qxd4
cxd4 13. Nxf7 ({or} 13. Rxf7 {(!)} Bxe5 14. Rf1 {(?!)} ({but} 14. Bf4 $1 {is
far better, with an obvious advantage:} Nc6 15. Bxe5 Nxe5 16. Rc7 Nd5 17. Bxd5
exd5 18. Na3 O-O 19. Re1 {etc.}) 14... Nc6 {'Black would have escaped from all
his difficulties'}) 13... O-O 14. Nd6 (14. Nh6+ $5) 14... Rxf1+ 15. Kxf1 Bd7
16. Nxb7 Na6 $1 {.}) 12. c3 ({Here} 12. dxc5 Qxd1 13. Rxd1 {was slightly more
attractive than on the previous move, but I did not even consider exchanging
the queens so early, especially as after} N6d7 14. Ne4 {(Stohl)} ({or} 14. Be3
Nxe5 15. Nc3 Na6) 14... Nxe5 15. h3 Na6 16. Be3 Bd7 {White would have been in
danger of selling his advantage too cheaply.}) 12... Nc6 $2 {A positional
blunder, after which White's initiative becomes threatening.} (12... cxd4 $1
13. cxd4 {was essential and only now} Nc6 {. I was intending to continue} 14.
Nf3 f6 15. Nc3 $1 fxe5 (15... Nd5 16. exf6 $1) 16. Bg5 {with good compensation
for the pawn; moreover, I did not especially calculate the variations and I
was sure that White was risking far less than Black.} -- ({. Thus} 16... Qe8 {
(?)} 17. dxe5 Nxe5 18. Nxe5 Rxf1+ 19. Qxf1 Bxe5 {is bad because of} 20. Rd1 $1
Bd7 ({or} 20... Nd7 21. Ne4) 21. Bf6 {and wins.}) (16... Qd7 17. dxe5 Nxe5 18.
Nxe5 {is more acceptable for Black} -- ({, here many have played} 18... Rxf1+ {
(?)} 19. Qxf1 Qd4+ 20. Kh1 Qxe5 {, although after} 21. Bd8 $1 {White has a
powerful attack:} Qc5 (21... Ra6 22. Rd1 $1) 22. Ne4 Qc6 (22... Qb4 $2 23. Ng5
$1 Kh8 24. Qf7 {and wins, Grischuk-Ponomariov, Torshavn 2000}) 23. Ng5 Nd5 24.
-- ({, and now not} 24. Qf7+ {(?)} Kh8 25. Rf1 {(Berelowitsch-Gerzhoy,
Coulsdon 2008)} Ne3 $1 26. Ne4 (26. Rg1 Nd5) 26... Bd7 $1 27. Bf6 Rg8 {with
equality}) ({, but the forceful} 24. Rc1 $1 Qe8 ({or} 24... Qd7 25. Nxe6 $1
Qxe6 26. Re1 Be5 27. Bc7 {, demolishing Black's defences}) 25. Bxd5 exd5 26.
Re1 $1)) ({. Therefore Black has to go into the endgame -} 18... Qxd1 19. Raxd1
Rxf1+ $5 (19... Bxe5 20. Rfe1 $1 {Korneev-Janev, Cutro 2002}) 20. Kxf1 Bxe5 {
with an extra pawn for Black, although after} 21. Be3 {he faces a struggle for
a draw;} (21. Bd8 Bxc3 $1 22. bxc3 Nd5 {is not so clear.})))) 13. Ne4 $1 {(3) 
An unpleasant surprise, which wrecks Black's plans. To avert a conflagration
on the f6-square, he is forced to make an awkward move, forgetting about
counterplay in the centre.} Nd7 ({Alas! The capture on d4 would have lost
quickly:} 13... cxd4 $2 14. Bg5 Qd7 (14... Qc7 15. cxd4) 15. Nf6+ Bxf6 16. Bxf6
h5 (16... dxc3 17. Qc1 $1 {and Qh6}) 17. Qc1 Kh7 18. Rf3 $1 {with the
murderous threat of Rh3xh5+.}) 14. Be3 {(17) Reinforcing the centre and
preparing Na3-b5(c4).} ({The attempt to take the black position by storm could
have ended in failure -} 14. Bg5 $6 Qb6 15. Nf6+ $2 (15. dxc5 Nxc5 16. Be3 Qxb3
17. Bxc5 {really is better}) 15... Bxf6 $1 16. exf6 cxd4 17. Kh1 Nc5 18. Bc4 ({
or} 18. Nd2 e5) 18... e5 {etc.}) 14... Ne7 ({If} 14... Qb6 $6 {, then} 15. Na3
cxd4 16. Nc4 {is strong}) ({or if} 14... cxd4 15. cxd4 Qb6 $6 {-} 16. Rf3 $1 {
. Black is hoping to overcome his difficulties by covering his weakened
kingside with the knight and fianchettoing the light-square bishop.}) 15. Bg5
$1 {(21) This unexpected reply disrupts Black's plans. To get rid of the pin
on his knight at e7 he is forced to go in for a further weakening of his
kingside.} cxd4 {It never rains but it pours!} ({It turns out that the bishop
cannot be driven away without first freeing the best square c3 for the white
knight: if} 15... h6 16. Bh4 g5 $2 {White has the decisive} 17. Bxg5 $1 cxd4 (
17... hxg5 18. Qh5) 18. Bxe7 Qxe7 19. cxd4 f6 20. Nbc3 fxe5 21. d5 $1 {,
whereas the exchange in the centre eliminates this danger.}) 16. cxd4 h6 17.
Bh4 g5 18. Bf2 {(3)} ({Not now} 18. Bxg5 $2 hxg5 19. Qh5 Nxe5 $1 20. dxe5 Qd4+
21. Nf2 Qxb2 22. Ra3 Ng6 ({or} 22... Qxe5 {.})) 18... Ng6 19. Nbc3 Qe7 {(Black
tries to free himself by ...f7-f5; understandably, White prevents this)} 20.
Bc2 $1 {(9) Aiming at the g6-knight.} b6 ({If} 20... f5 {there is not only}
21. Nd6 ({but also} 21. exf6 Nxf6 22. Nxg5 $1 {.})) 21. Be3 {(6) Thanks to
the efforts of this bishop Black's position has an unattractive appearance,
and one senses that the decisive blow is not far off.} Ba6 {(alas, belated
development)} 22. Rf2 {(3)} (22. Nb5 $5 {was a worthy alternative.}) 22... Nh8
$2 {Both a delay, and an ugly 'corner' move. Palatnik is consistent in his
desire to free himself - Black again prepares ...f7-f5, and therefore he
removes his knight from the oppressive glare of the bishop on c2. But White
already has everything prepared.} ({Good or bad, the immediate} 22... f5 $1 {
was esential, since} 23. exf6 Nxf6 24. Nxg5 {is not so clear in view of} Nd5 {
(Stohl)} ({or even} 24... Nh4 {. However, after 23 Nd6 White would retain an
overwhelming positional advantage.})) 23. Bxg5 $5 {(17) In the period of my
chess youth I rarely refrained from such spectacular blows. And for a long
time, under the impression of the rout which followed, I considered this move
to be the shortest way to the goal. Indeed, the subsequent events develop by
force, and in all variations the sacrifices are correct. But I couldn't help
thinking that it was possible to manage without 'brilliance'.} ({When, on my
return to Baku, I showed this game to Vladimir Andreevich Makogonov, he
suddenly asked: 'But wouldn't it have been simpler to play h2-h4?' Thus
another solution to the position was found, one not involving any sacrifices:} 
23. h4 $1 gxh4 ({or} 23... f5 24. exf6 Nxf6 25. hxg5) 24. Qh5 $1 f5 25. exf6
Nxf6 26. Nxf6+ Rxf6 27. Nd5 exd5 28. Qxd5+ {and Qxa8. This continuation is
undoubtedly more practical, but then there would not have been the fireworks
with the sacrifice of both bishops, and an attack in which all (!) the white
pieces participated. Later, the experience acquired from tournament battles
would have suggested to me 23 h4. But, in any case, the vigorous, 'emotional'
implementation of this game afforded me a great deal of pleasure. And not only
me...}) 23... hxg5 24. Qh5 f5 ({It is not possible to withstand the onslaught
after} 24... f6 25. Nxg5) (24... Rfc8 25. Nxg5 Ra7 ({or} 25... Nf8 26. Nce4)
26. Re1 {.}) 25. Nxg5 Rf7 {The most resilient defence.} ({Black would have
lost more quickly after both} 25... Bxe5 26. dxe5 Nxe5 27. Re1 Nhg6 28. Bb3 Bc8
29. Nd5 $1 {(Stohl)}) ({and} 25... Rfc8 {(d8)} 26. Bxf5 exf5 27. Nd5 $1) ({or} 
25... Nf6 26. Nd5 $3 {. --- After making this move, Palatnik unexpectedly
offered a draw! I was very surprised: it is patently obvious just how strong
White's attack is. Perhaps the tournament leader, realising that his position
was hopeless, was trying a last chance? At any event, my silent reply was a
new sacrifice.}) 26. Bxf5 $1 {(4) The crux of the combination. The sacrifice
of the second bishop conclusively destroys the black king's defences.} (26. d5
$5 Bxe5 27. Nxf7 {would also have won, but the move in the game is both
prettier, and better.}) 26... Rxf5 ({If} 26... exf5 {, then} 27. Nd5 Qe8 28.
Nc7 {is decisive.}) 27. Rxf5 exf5 28. Nd5 {Things have unexpectedly become
tight for the black queen. There remains only one square where, not for long,
it finds salvation.} Qe8 29. Qh7+ Kf8 30. Qxf5+ Kg8 ({Or} 30... Nf7 31. Ne6+
Kg8 32. Qg6 {.}) 31. Qh7+ Kf8 32. Ra3 {(2) Aiming to conclude the game by a
direct attack.} (32. Nf4 $5 Bc4 33. Rf1 $1 {(Stohl) was also good.}) 32... Rc8
({Or} 32... Qg6 33. Rf3+ Ke8 34. Qg8+ Bf8 (34... Nf8 35. Rxf8+ $1 Bxf8 36. Nf6+
) 35. Nc7+ Ke7 (35... Kd8 36. Nge6+) 36. Rf7+ $1 Qxf7 37. Nxf7 {etc.}) 33. Rf3+
{(4)} Nf6 {A time-trouble gesture of despair;} ({after} 33... Nf7 34. Rxf7+
Qxf7 35. Nxf7 Rc1+ ({or} 35... Kxf7 36. Qf5+) 36. Kf2 Rf1+ 37. Kg3 Rxf7 38. Qh4
$1 {Black would have lost material.}) 34. h3 ({The immediate} 34. Rxf6+ Bxf6
35. Nxf6 {was also possible.}) 34... Qg6 35. Rxf6+ Bxf6 36. Ne6+ Ke8 37. Nxf6+
{. Here Palatnik froze for an instant, made a despairing gesture as if to show
that there was nowhere further to go, and stopped the clocks. --- Times: 2.15-2.28. --- Around the table where we were playing, as usual there was a
crowd of many experienced spectators, including the other contestants. There
were even more of them during analysis after the game... From the press: 'A
crushing defeat. The methods of conducting an attack in Kasparov's games are
apparently evoked by the wonderful creative heritage of the great Alekhine'.
--- After this inspirational win I reached 5½ out of 7 and I was leading the
tournament together with Alburt, who on the neighbouring board defeated
Faibisovich. Then Nikitin, seeing my condition, decided again to make a
correction to the 'obligations undertaken': perhaps the idea of qualifying for
the Premier League should not be dismissed?!} 1-0

[Event "28: All-Union Qualifier, Daugavpils"]
[Site "?"]
[Date "1978.07.06"]
[Round "8"]
[White "Alburt, L."]
[Black "Kasparov, G."]
[Result "0-1"]
[ECO "E74"]
[Annotator "Garry Kasparov"]
[PlyCount "112"]
[EventDate "1978.??.??"]
[Source "Everyman Chess"]
[SourceDate "2012.11.28"]

{But in the next round I faced a very dangerous opponent, Lev Alburt, the
winner of the same tournament the previous year. Like Palatnik, he was from
Odessa, but now both of them have long been Americans. It is noteworthy that
this fighting game was published both in the weekly 64 (with notes by Alburt)
and in the magazine Shakhmaty v SSSR (with my commentary), but it was removed
from the book The Test of Time: in the summer of 1979, following Korchnoi's
example, my opponent defected...} 1. c4 Nf6 2. Nc3 g6 3. d4 Bg7 4. e4 d6 5. Be2
O-O 6. Bg5 {Although Alburt constantly employed the Averbakh Variation with
White, I had a rather vague impression of its subtleties, since I had only
just risen to that level of competition where genuinely professional
preparation, including that in the opening, was needed. I knew about a
comparatively fresh idea 12...Qa5, which had briefly appeared in the chess
press - this was the extent of my knowledge before the game.} c5 {According to
Geller, the most critical continuation (an immediate attack on the centre),
but at the same time a strategically risky one.} ({Later I played} 6... Nbd7 {
(Game No.76)}) ({but when I had matured as a King's Indian player I arrived at
} 6... Na6 {(Bareev-Kasparov, Linares 1992).}) 7. d5 h6 ({I have also played} 
7... b5 $6 8. cxb5 a6 {- Game Nos.58, 67.}) 8. Bf4 {An attempt to hinder the
undermining move ...e7-e6.} (8. Be3 e6 9. Qd2 exd5 10. exd5 {is more harmless
- here Black can play in various ways, for example:} Kh7 11. h3 Re8 12. Nf3 Bf5
{with equality (Dydyshko-Kasparov, Minsk 1978).}) 8... e6 {Nevertheless!} ({
Another try is} 8... Qb6 9. Qd2 e6 10. dxe6 Bxe6 {, excluding} 11. Bxd6 $6 {in
view of} Rd8 12. e5 Ne8 {, but allowing 11 Bxh6 or 11 0-0-0.}) 9. dxe6 Bxe6 10.
Bxd6 ({Now if} 10. Qd2 {not only} Qb6 {is possible,} ({but also} 10... Qa5 $5 {
.})) 10... Re8 11. Nf3 Nc6 ({From the early 1980s} 11... Qb6 $5 {became
popular:} {or} 12. Bxb8 (12. e5 Nfd7) 12... Raxb8 13. Qc2 Nh5 {with
double-edged play.}) 12. O-O Qa5 $6 {We played all this at lightning speed,
and I 'rattled out' the prepared queen move, which at the time appealed to me
more than the frequently-played 12...Nd4. I thought that the d-file was needed
for a black rook, to emphasise the drawbacks to the placing of the white
pieces on this file.} ({Besides, one of the recent games on the '} 12... Nd4 {
' theme -} 13. e5 Nd7 14. Nxd4 cxd4 15. Qxd4 Nxe5 16. Bxe5 Qxd4 17. Bxd4 Bxd4
18. Rac1 Rad8 19. b3 Bxc3 20. Rxc3 Rd2 21. Bf3 Rxa2 22. Bxb7 Rb8 {had
proceeded and concluded favourably for White (Alburt-Timoshchenko, Beltsy 1977)
. However, subsequent games showed that Black has quite adequate compensation
for the pawn - here I myself gained a draw against Polugayevsky (Bugojno 1982),
while later I spent a long time analysing this complicated endgame and I found,
as it seemed to me, an accurate way to maintain the balance. --- As for the
queen sortie, I never repeated it again, since it transpired that it was
dubious and perhaps even deserving of a question mark.}) 13. Nd2 $1 {A novelty
from a 1977 game that was unknown to us. The grandmaster made the knight move
with unconcealed pleasure - he 'had analysed it a great deal and come to the
conclusion that White should gain an advantage' (Alburt).} ({At the board I
now had to solve a difficult problem. At home I had made a quite detailed
analysis of the variations} 13. e5 Nd7 14. Nd5 Bxd5 {(L.Popov-Cebalo, Zagreb
1973)}) ({and} 13. a3 Red8 $1 (13... Rad8 14. b4 $1) 14. b4 cxb4 15. axb4 Qxa1
16. Qxa1 Nxe4 {with good compensation for the queen (Azmaiparashvili-Lanka,
Sochi 1978). This helped me to quickly find the correct arrangement of the
pieces (although initially, on seeing the dangers present, I felt sad - but I
did not let on!).}) 13... Red8 {(10) Only this rook! The e8-square must be
free for the retreat of the knight.} ({After} 13... Rad8 $6 14. e5 Nd7 15. f4 {
White achieves everything: both an extra pawn, and a positional advantage.}) (
13... Nd4 $6 {is also insufficient:} 14. Bd3 (14. e5 $5) 14... Rad8 15. Nb3
Nxb3 16. axb3 Qb6 17. Bf4 g5 18. Bc1 Ng4 {(Farago-Perenyi, Budapest 1977)} 19.
Nd5 $1 Qd6 20. f4 $1 {etc. --- After this and right up to the 25th move my
opponent continued playing at high speed, as though demonstrating his
knowledge to me.}) 14. Nb3 $6 ({In the event of} 14. e5 Ne8 $1 15. Nb3 Qb6 {
Black escapes from his difficulties:} 16. -- (16. Nd5 $6 Bxd5 17. Bxc5 Be6 $1 (
17... Qc7 $6 18. cxd5 Bxe5 19. g3 {and Bf3}) 18. Bxb6 Rxd1 19. Rfxd1 axb6 20.
f4 f6 $1) ({, or} 16. Na4 Qb4 17. Nbxc5 Bxc4 $1 ({of course, not} 17... Bxe5 $2
18. a3) 18. a3 Bxe2 19. Qxe2 (19. axb4 Bxd1 20. Rfxd1 b5 {is equal}) 19... Qf4
20. Rad1 b6 21. g3 Qf5 {with a good game.})) ({But a year later Uhlmann
improved White's play by} 14. Bf4 $1 {with the idea of} Nd4 ({or} 14... Ne8 15.
Nd5 $1 {(Ivkov-Torre, Rio de Janeiro Interzonal 1979)}) ({It is possible that} 
14... Qb6 {is better, but this is a largely theoretical question, since the
variation with 12...Qa5 has almost gone out of use}) 15. Nd5 $1 {, as in his
games with Ghitescu, Peev (Bucharest 1979) and Sznapik (Berlin 1979).}) 14...
Qb6 {Forcing events - the threat is ...Ne8.} 15. Na4 ({The undefended pawn
cannot be taken immediately -} 15. Nxc5 $2 Rxd6 $1 16. Qxd6 Ne8 {, but it
needs to be taken, as otherwise Black will soon make short work of the bishop
on d6.}) 15... Qb4 16. Nbxc5 ({Despite the approximate material equality, the
position in the variation} 16. Naxc5 Ne8 17. a3 Qb6 18. Na4 Rxd6 $1 19. Nxb6
Rxd1 20. Nxa8 Rd8 21. Nc5 Nd4 {is advantageous to Black in view of the
activity of his pieces. 'He traps the errant knight, and White has no
advantage' (Alburt).}) 16... Bxc4 {(9)} 17. Bxc4 ({Nothing was given by
including the moves} 17. a3 Qb5 {, for example:} 18. Bxc4 ({or} 18. Nc3 Bxe2
19. Nxb5 Bxd1 20. Rfxd1 b6 21. Nb7 Rd7 22. Rac1 Rxb7 23. Rxc6 Nxe4) 18... Qxc4
19. Rc1 (19. Nxb7 Nxe4) 19... Qb5 20. Nc3 Qb6 21. b4 Ne5 $1 {, forcing} 22.
Bxe5 Rxd1 23. Rfxd1 Rd8 {, in each case with equality.}) 17... Qxc4 18. Nxb7
Nxe4 {(2) The first result of the white knight's leap to a4 - a valuable pawn
has fallen. There now begins the concluding stage of the complications, which
Black had to foresee when he made his 13th move. Moreover, as in the game with
Nikolaevsky, the picture of the final position (after the 24th move) formed in
my mind almost immediately, and this gave me confidence that there should not
be any unpleasantness for Black.} 19. Rc1 Qb5 {(2)} 20. Nxd8 $6 {The most
obvious move;} ({but nevertheless} 20. Nac5 {was safer, after which there
would have followed} Nd4 $1 {.} 21. -- ({. Now} 21. Nxe4 Qxb7 {(suggested by
Gufeld in 'Informator')} 22. Re1 Nf5 {causes White some problems}) ({, but the
preparatory} 21. a4 $1 {(safeguarding the pawn in advance) leads after} Qb6 22.
Nxe4 ({or first} 22. a5 Qb5) ({if White does not like the questionable} 22.
Nxd8 Nxd6 23. Nxf7 Nxf7 24. Nd3 Rd8 25. Re1 {with a rook and a couple of pawns
for two minor pieces}) 22... Qxb7 23. Re1 {to approximate equality - Black
easily regains the pawn, but he can hardly hope for more (} Nf5 24. Rc2 {etc.).
})) 20... Rxd8 21. Qc2 $1 Nd4 $1 {Two forced moves.} 22. Qxe4 Ne2+ 23. Kh1 Nxc1
24. Rxc1 Rxd6 {After a short battle the ranks of the two sides' forces have
been greatly thinned. The opening balance - extra pawn for White, activity for
Black - has remained. --- Alburt: 'On these 24 moves I spent about 15 minutes,
and my opponent - about an hour. Everything seemed to be alright. The
resulting position was well known to me - I had analysed it a few years
earlier and had come to the conclusion that White has the advantage - he is a
pawn up and there does not appear to be any danger... To all appearances it
seemed that the young player was not familiar with the subtleties of the
variation, and he was having to solve the problems at the board. In short, I
had been given a start: a time advantage in a very familiar position.' --- But
Lev had assessed incorrectly the prospects of the two sides - there is some
danger for White: his knight is obviously inferior in mobility to the bishop 
(and it is also stuck on the edge of the board!), and his king has no escape
square. I was happy with my position, reckoning that Black had full
compensation for the pawn, but at that moment I would not have objected to a
draw.} 25. Qc2 {This, the last move of White's home preparation (as my
opponent informed me after the game), is not altogether accurate;} ({he would
have done better to free his queen of minor concerns and play} 25. b3 $5 Rd2
26. Qa8+ Kh7 27. Qxa7 {, when Black's activity is insufficient for a win:} -- (
27... Qf5 28. Qc5 Be5 29. Kg1 $1 Qd3 30. Qxe5 $1 Rd1+ 31. Qe1 Rxe1+ 32. Rxe1
Qc2 33. g3 Qxa2 34. Re3 {, creating a fortress}) (27... Qd5 28. Rf1 Bd4 29. Qc7
{(a6)} Qf5 30. Qc4 Rxf2 (30... h5 31. b4 $1 h4 32. h3) 31. Rxf2 Qxf2 32. Qc1
Qxa2 (32... h5 33. b4) 33. Qd1 Qf2 34. b4 $1 {and Nc5, when White gains a draw
by activating his knight (it is important that he has succeeded in picking up
the a7-pawn).})) ({But, of course, not} 25. Qa8+ $6 Kh7 26. Qxa7 $2 Ra6 {.})
25... Qg5 $1 {(5) Playing on the weakness of the 1st rank. From the reaction
of my opponent I realised that he had not considered this at home. Alburt: 'I
underestimated the queen move - ...Rd2 is threatened.'} 26. Rd1 $2 {A tactical
oversight, and essentially the decisive mistake.} ({Earlier I advised 'seeking
a draw' with} 26. Qc5 {(?!), but after} Qxc5 (26... Qd2 27. Rf1 Qe2 28. Qc1 Rd2
{and ...Bd4 is also interesting}) 27. Nxc5 Bxb2 28. Re1 Rd5 $1 29. Nb3 a5 {it
is not easy to find.}) ({However,} 26. g3 {would have enabled White, with
accurate defence, to hold this slightly inferior position:} Rd4 ({or} 26... Rd2
27. Qc5 Rxf2 28. Qxg5 hxg5 29. Rc8+ Kh7 30. Rc7 {and Rd7!}) 27. b3 Qd5+ (27...
Rd2 {is no better:} 28. Qc5 Qxc5 29. Nxc5 Rxa2 ({or} 29... Rxf2 30. a4) 30. f4)
28. Kg1 Rd2 29. Qc5 Qf3 (29... Qd4 30. a3) 30. Qe3 $1 Qxe3 31. fxe3 Rxa2 32.
Rc7 {etc.}) 26... Qf5 $1 {Eliminating the important f2-pawn. Later I
remembered for a long time this hard-working queen, which in the end
demolished the opponent's defences.} 27. Qc1 Rxd1+ 28. Qxd1 Qxf2 {Material
equality has been restored, and the difference in the activity of the pieces
has become dangerously threatening for White.} 29. Qg1 $2 {In his distress my
opponent makes another, final mistake.} ({It is amusing that in '64' and then
also in 'Informator' a different move order was given, one that would have led
to a position from the game, but a move earlier:} 29. b3 {(Alburt: 'I decided
to give up a pawn immediately, in order to drag back the knight from its
offside position at a4')} Qxa2 30. Nc5 Qf2 31. Nd3 Qe3 32. Qf1 Bd4 33. Qd1 h5
34. Nb4 h4 {etc.}) ({It was more resilient to try and preserve the queenside
pawns by} 29. Qc1 {and although after} Be5 30. h3 h5 31. Nc3 ({if} 31. Qd1 {
there is also} g5 $5 32. Qc1 Kh7 {with the idea of ...g5-g4}) 31... h4 {
White's position is unenviable, I would still have had to work pretty hard.}) (
{After} 29. Qb1 Be5 {Black is threatening ...Qf4.}) 29... Qc2 {(2)} 30. b3 ({
Of course, not} 30. Qxa7 $2 Qd1+ 31. Qg1 Qxa4 {and wins.}) 30... Qxa2 {(2) It
is now Black who is a pawn up, and this is by no means all.} 31. Nc5 ({Again
White cannot play} 31. Qxa7 $2 Qxb3 32. g3 ({or} 32. h3 Be5) 32... Qd5+ {and ...Bd4.}) 31... Qd2 $6 {(2)} ({'} 31... Qc2 {was simpler, not releasing the
knight at all', I wrote in 1978.}) ({More than that -} 31... Qa3 $1 {would
have led to the quick win of a piece or the b-pawn.}) 32. Qb1 Bd4 {(5)} 33. Nd3
Qe3 {(5)} 34. Nb4 h5 {(3)} ({It was possible to pursue the knight -} 34... a5
$5 35. Nd3 (35. Nc6 Bb6) (35. Nc2 Qd3) 35... Qe2 36. Nf4 Qd2 37. Nh3 g5 {etc.
But I had already planned the advance of the h-pawn, and I was ready not only
for an attack, but also for mass exchanges.}) 35. Qd1 h4 (35... a5 $5 {.}) 36.
Nc2 $6 {Falling in with my wishes. Alburt apparently sensed that I had missed
the strongest continuation, and he visibly revived on seeing a 'saving chance'.
} (36. h3 {would have delayed the end, but after} Bc5 (36... Be5 37. Nc6 {is
not so clear}) 37. Nd3 Bb6 38. Qb1 (38. b4 Bc7 $1 {with the threat of ...Qg3})
38... a5 {White would have lost because of zugzwang:} 39. Qd1 Qd4 40. Qb1 Kh7
$1 (40... Bc7 41. Ne1 $1) 41. Qf1 Kg7 42. Qb1 (42. Ne1 Qd1 $1) 42... Kg8 43.
Qf1 Bc7 $1 44. Nc1 Qd6 45. Kg1 Qh2+ 46. Kf2 Qe5 47. Kg1 Qd6 {, soon winning
the b3-pawn.}) 36... Qxb3 37. Qxd4 Qb1+ $1 {'Garik drives the enemy queen from
the centre - this is useful!' (Alburt).} ({It was not yet too late to throw
away the win:} 37... Qxc2 $2 38. Qd8+ Kg7 39. Qd4+ f6 40. Qxa7+ Kh6 41. h3 {.})
38. Qg1 Qxc2 39. Qxa7 Qd1+ 40. Qg1 Qxg1+ 41. Kxg1 {'The pawn endgame is won
for Black, but he has to play accurately' (Alburt). In preparations for one of
the sessions of the Botvinnik school I had done some thorough work on pawn
endings, and therefore I knew the winning method here. --- The time control
was reached, but the game was not adjourned, because the end of the playing
session was still a long way off: both of us, and I especially, had played
quickly and accumulated an enormous time 'surplus'.} Kg7 42. Kf2 Kf6 {(3)} 43.
Ke3 Ke5 {(3)} 44. Kf3 f5 45. Ke3 g5 46. h3 (46. Kf3 {was bad because of} g4+ {
followed by ...f5-f4, ...g4-g3 and if hxg3 the symmetric ...hxg3!. 'Alas, 46
h3 also does not save White: Black employs an outflanking manoeuvre' (Alburt).}
) 46... Kd5 $1 ({'The masters tightly surrounding the board had time to
calculate the variation} 46... g4 $2 47. hxg4 fxg4 48. Kf2 Ke4 (48... Kf4 49.
g3+ $1) 49. Ke2 g3 50. Kf1 Ke3 51. Kg1 Ke2 52. Kh1 h3 53. Kg1 $1 {with a draw,
but Garik interrupted their searches by continuing his series of moves.' 
(Nikitin)}) 47. Kd3 Kc5 (47... f4 48. Kd2 Kd4 49. Ke2 Ke4 50. Kf2 f3 51. gxf3+
Kf4 {would also have won. However, I went my own way.}) 48. Kc3 g4 49. Kd3 gxh3
({Or} 49... g3 50. Ke3 Kc4 51. Kf4 Kd3 {and wins.}) 50. gxh3 Kd5 51. Ke3 Ke5
52. Kf3 f4 53. Kf2 Ke4 54. Ke2 f3+ 55. Kf1 {And here to all those present I
had the pleasure of demonstrating the famous 'triangulation' - a way of giving
the opponent the move.} Kf5 $1 ({(only not} 55... Ke3 56. Ke1 f2+ $2 57. Kf1
Kf3 {- stalemate!)}) 56. Kg1 Ke5 {. It is not especially difficult to find the
last two moves, if you know the principle of the distant opposition or the
ending of the old game Fahrni-Alapin, which is given in books on the endgame.}
({White resigned: After} 56... Ke5 57. Kf1 Ke4 58. Kf2 Kf4 59. Kf1 Kg3 {the
h3-pawn is lost. --- Times: 1.52-1.10.}) (56... -- {Alburt: 'Garik's play in
this game created a strong impression on me. At the board he easily figured
out the tactical subtleties of the variation, accurately assessed the position,
and then demonstrated excellent technique in converting his advantage.' ---
Suddenly, after winning four successive games, I became the sole leader of the
tournament - 6½ out of 8! The last two wins over the Odessa duo effectively
brought me into grandmaster company. I did not have to wait long for the
formal confirmation of my playing strength... --- However, hard on my heels
was another rival - the talented master Igor Ivanov, formerly from Leningrad,
then living in Uzbekistan. Around that time he won several Soviet tournaments
and in the 1979 Spartakiad he defeated none other than the world champion
Karpov, but a year later he followed Korchnoi and Alburt, in becoming the
third chess defector (and in the end - a grandmaster). Ivanov began the
qualifying tournament in Daugavpils with two losses, but then he scored six
successive wins! We met in the 9th round and, after not achieving anything
with White from the opening, I complicated the play with a pawn sacrifice. In
a roughly equal position, not wishing to tempt fate further against a
formidable opponent, I offered a draw, but encountered a refusal. And - I
promptly developed a dangerous attack! However, at a critical moment I
released the black queen, and the draw became obvious.}) (56... -- {Nikitin
was unhappy with my 'pacifism' (he later had to speak more than once about
this psychological defect): 'On seeing a way of making his opponent force a
draw, Garry did not bother to look for a stronger move. Such a situation of
fighting with yourself was once described by Karpov, who drew this apt
conclusion: "It's not possible to play for a win, when in your heart you are
agreeable to a draw". To overcome yourself in such a position you have to love
chess madly - for example, like Fischer'. --- But my reserve of nervous energy
was already exhausted. In the 10th round literally in one move I threw away my
advantage in a game with Kapengut, whereas Ivanov won against Palatnik and
caught up with me - we both had 7½ out of 10 ('plus five'!). In the
concluding three rounds the contenders for finishing in the cherished first
seven endeavoured not to lose their precious 'pluses', and the leading group
was seized by a drawing epidemic. --- And so I reached the finish together
with Ivanov, sharing 1st-2nd places. Fortune favoured me: I had the better
Buchholz score. Nikitin: 'Garik jumped for joy. Where had the tiredness gone?
Despite such an insipid finish he unexpectedly won the only qualifying place
to the Premier League - a stunning success!' I remember that, when there were
no places on the participants' bus for me and my mother and we had to get off,
the inveterate wit Eduard Gufeld shouted after us: 'Yes, mother, we are going
a different way!' Everyone laughed loudly, but these were prophetic words:
subsequently I never played again either in the qualifying tournament, or in
the First League... --- Apart from Ivanov, those who qualified for the First
League were Kapengut, Kupreichik, Mikhalchishin, Panchenko and Tseshkovsky,
and later, after Panchenko withdrew, Alburt and Makarychev were also allowed
in. And, incidentally, three prize-winners in the qualifying tournament -
grandmasters Tseshkovsky, Mikhalchishin and Makarychev managed to break
through into the Premier League, and later Tseshkovsky even became champion of
the country (cf. the next chapter).}) (56... -- {From the magazine Shakhmaty v
SSSR: 'The main examinations of any young player's maturity are the
championships of the country. It was such an examination that Kasparov took in
Daugavpils. The confident play he demonstrated indicates that, under the
guidance of Botvinnik, Garik has already passed his first tests. A qualitative
leap has occurred in his play, one which it will be possible to evaluate
conclusively only during the USSR Championship Premier League in Tbilisi.
Kasparov's victory in Daugavpils was no accident. For the first time a
15-year-old player will perform in the main tournament of the country - Garik
has established a record of its kind'. --- From the Riga magazine Shakhmaty:
'Modern chess is increasingly becoming a young man's game. But even so, when a
15-year-old boy demonstrates an encyclopaedic knowledge of the openings, rich
imagination, rapid calculation in highly complicated middlegame situations,
and a possession of good technique for converting an advantage in the endgame
- all this cannot but cause astonishment'. --- Bagirov: 'I did not exclude the
possibility of Kasparov qualifying for the First League. But that which he
accomplished exceeded all expectations. From my heart I congratulate my young
compatriot, and I hope that in the elite too he will not prove "out of place".
' --- Botvinnik: 'During the six months since the Sokolsky Memorial, Kasparov
has made a huge leap forward. I realised this when playing through his games
from the qualifying tournament. I am in no doubt that in the Premier League
Kasparov will certainly not look a timid novice. I like the fact that in every
game, irrespective of the standard of his opponent, he puts his heart into it
and always aims only for a win. At his 15 years he thinks at the board and
calculates variations better than I did at his age. At the age of 12, when
Kasparov was already a candidate master, I had only just begun playing chess...
For Garik I have one wish - don't become conceited! This is now the main
thing'. --- So, in two leaps I jumped straight into adulthood. I was full of
energy and any doubts about my future disappeared. From now on my life would
be devoted to chess!}) 0-1

[Event "?"]
[Site "?"]
[Date "????.??.??"]
[Round "?"]
[White "High Society Debut"]
[Black "?"]
[Result "*"]
[Annotator "Garry Kasparov"]
[PlyCount "1"]
[EventDate "1984.??.??"]
[SourceDate "2012.12.07"]

{46th USSR Championship Premier League (Tbilisi, 1-27 December 1978): 1.
Tseshkovsky and 2. Tal - 11 out of 17; 3. Polugaevsky - 10; 4. Georgadze - 9½; 5-8. Sveshnikov, Geller, Romanishin and Beliavsky - 9; 9. Kasparov - 8½;
10-13. Gulko, Timoshchenko, Bagirov and Makarychev - 8; 14-16. Razuvaev,
Tukmakov and Mikhalchishin - 7½; 17. Dorfman - 6½; 18. Kuzmin - 6.} 1. -- {
From the Baku Sport newspaper (July 1978): 'Garry Kasparov, a star pupil in
the 8th class of Baku school No.151, has put aside chess matters for a time
and is relaxing on the banks of the Caspian Sea. But at the end of the year,
for the first time in his life, he is due to meet some famous grandmasters in
the championship of the country in Tbilisi. Kasparov does not hide his joy, as
he awaits his December rendezvous with the best players in the country, but at
the same time he is very cautious in assessing his chances: "I should like to
finish no lower than 14th, to avoid returning back into the qualifying
tournament. To finish in the top nine, thus booking my place in the next
premier league, will be very difficult".'} (1. -- {When preparing for my first
USSR championship final, I did not set myself any ambitious targets, thinking
that first and foremost I should demonstrate good play and gain experience.
Nikitin always used to say that the main thing was to play well, and the
successes would follow. True, I later learned that back in 1975 he had shown
my mother a schedule of my future results. Against the year 1978 was marked:
USSR Championship Premier League. --- Not long before, at the tournament in
Minsk, I had been anxiously awaiting my first meeting with a grandmaster,
whereas now I was opposed by as many as 16 holders of the top title.
Botvinnik's strategic directive was extremely clear: 'Play 17 good games,
without thinking about the overall result'. Of course, I couldn't help
thinking about the result, but I didn't set my sights too high: not to drop
below the First League. But the start of the championship went well for me.
--- On arriving at the wonderful Tbilisi Chess Palace, where the tournament
was to be held, I suddenly remembered that I would not be playing for the
first time on that stage: in January 1976 it was here that the concluding
round of my victorious USSR Junior Championship took place (cf. Game No.13).
But now I would have to come on to the stage every day, and under the intense
gaze of numerous spectators battle with the 'big boys'. And whirling around in
my mind was the agonising question, whether I would be able to survive in a
competition with the titans, from the games of whom I had learned and whom
until quite recently I was able to meet only in a simultaneous display.}) *

[Event "29: 46th USSR Championship, Tbilisi"]
[Site "?"]
[Date "1978.12.02"]
[Round "1"]
[White "Geller, Ye"]
[Black "Kasparov, G."]
[Result "1/2-1/2"]
[ECO "B19"]
[Annotator "Garry Kasparov"]
[PlyCount "83"]
[EventDate "1978.??.??"]
[Source "Everyman Chess"]
[SourceDate "2012.11.28"]

{In the 1st round I was paired with Black against the great Yefim Geller. The
difference in experience was vast: as yet I had none, whereas he had already
participated three times in the Candidates events (and later he would do so a
further three times!). 'Has Garik prepared for fumigation?', they asked my
mother, who, of course, was very anxious that evening. After all, Geller not
only smoked a lot, but he also played excellently with White... --- Viktor
Khenkin: 'The pairings brought together the youngest and the oldest
participants in the tournament. Kasparov - 15, and Geller - 53. Almost 40
years separate the opponents - such a thing can only happen in chess. This
game was at the centre of attention. Apart from the character of the game
itself and the accompanying talk about the "passing of the baton from one
generation to another", everyone was intrigued by the question: how would the
young player adapt to the classical environment of the Premier League? I will
say straight away: both on the stage and at the chess board Garik conducted
himself as though all he had been doing throughout his life was to appear in
finals of the USSR Championship. And yet this was his first genuinely strong
tournament. The first stage, the first floodlights, and the first auditorium,
filled with hundreds of fans. Even highly experienced players are sometimes
unable to suppress the anxiety caused by the unusual circumstances. Remember
how in 1963 Petrosian lost the first game of his match with Botvinnik
effectively without a fight (and in 1949 the young Petrosian began with five
zeroes in his first USSR Championship, whereas another debutant - Geller -
shared 3rd place! - G.K.). Kasparov was certainly no less anxious. But even so,
he succeeded in focusing on customary chess images.' --- Yes, before the first
tournament game in my life against a world-class grandmaster I felt extremely
nervous. But when the arbiter started the clocks, the anxiety quickly subsided.
} 1. e4 c6 {At a reception at the end of the tournament, Gufeld laughingly
said to me within earshot of everyone: 'Why do you play the Caro-Kann all the
time?! Look at yourself in the mirror - you're just like one of the Mafia! You
should play only the Sicilian Defence!' And I myself began inclining towards
this under the influence of my games with Geller and Tseshkovsky, played in
Tbilisi.} 2. d4 d5 3. Nd2 dxe4 4. Nxe4 Bf5 5. Ng3 Bg6 6. h4 ({In Daugavpils
Kholmov successfully employed against me the rare plan with} 6. Nf3 Nd7 7. Bc4
{, and later he explained: 'After looking at the games of my opponent, I
concluded that he had an excellent knowledge of the main variations with 6 h4.
' After this lesson I endeavoured to expand my knowledge in 'my' variations.})
6... h6 7. Nf3 Nd7 8. h5 Bh7 9. Bd3 Bxd3 10. Qxd3 Qc7 (10... e6 {- Game No.17.}
) 11. Bd2 Ngf6 12. O-O-O e6 13. Ne4 {Geller's patent: White immediately
exchanges the knight which has no particular future on g3.} ({We had also
spent much time looking at another classical line -} 13. Qe2 O-O-O ({or the
sharper} 13... c5 14. Rh4 Rc8 {(Mikhalchishin-Kasparov, Daugavpils 1978)}) 14.
Ne5 {(Spassky-Petrosian, 13th match game, Moscow 1966)} Nb6 {.}) 13... O-O-O {
In those times this was a virtually obligatory move;} ({but later the flexible
} 13... Be7 {, retaining the option of kingside castling, also came into its
own.}) 14. g3 {With the intention of Bf4.} Nxe4 {(4) The natural reply.} (
14... Ng4 $6 15. Qe2 Ndf6 $6 16. Bf4 Qa5 $6 (16... Qd7 17. Ne5) {, is
unsuccessful on account of} 17. Nxf6 $1 gxf6 (17... Nxf6 18. Ne5) 18. Nd2 $1 f5
{(Geller-Petrosian, Moscow 1967)} 19. f3 $1 Nf6 20. Nb3 {with the threat of
Qe5.}) ({And if} 14... Nc5 15. Nxc5 Bxc5 {(I.Zaitsev-Petrosian, Moscow 1968),
then} 16. c4 {and Bc3 is good, although Black still plays this way.}) ({
Against Tseshkovsky in the 16th round I tried} 14... c5 $2 15. Bf4 c4 {(an
idea, generated in the hurly-burly of the tournament), and after} 16. Qe2 ({
after} 16. Bxc7 cxd3 17. Bxd8 $1 Nxe4 18. Rh4 $1 Nxf2 19. Rf1 {(d2) Black has
insufficient compensation for the exchange}) 16... Qc6 17. Nxf6 gxf6 18. d5 $1
exd5 19. Nd4 Qa6 20. Kb1 {I agonised terribly over the search for the best
defence.}) 15. Qxe4 {One of the tabiyas of the entire variation.} Be7 {(2) To
me and my trainer this seemed the most accurate move;} ({but later we gave
preference to the natural and still fashionable} 15... Nf6 16. Qe2 -- ({, and
now not} 16... c5 $6 17. dxc5 Bxc5 18. Rh4 $1 {(Geller-Foguelman, Santiago
1965; Tal-Hübner, Montreal 1979 - Game No.143 in Volume II of 'My Great
Predecessors')}) ({, but} 16... Bd6 17. c4 c5 18. Bc3 cxd4 19. Nxd4 (19. Bxd4
Qa5) 19... a6) ({, or even} 16... Rd5 {(Stein-Korchnoi, Sousse Interzonal 1967)
.})) ({The immediate} 15... Bd6 {is also not bad, with the idea of} 16. Kb1 ({
or} 16. c4 c5) 16... Rhe8 {, and if} 17. Qh7 {, then} Rg8 {(Kramnik-Leko, 12th
match game, Brissago 2004).}) 16. Kb1 ({Black would also have been satisfied
with} 16. Bf4 Bd6) ({as well as} 16. c4 c5 17. Bc3 Bf6) ({or} 16. Ne5 Nxe5 17.
dxe5 Rd5 {.}) 16... Rhe8 {(4)} 17. Qe2 $5 {A novelty! Removing his queen from
possible attacks, White prepares Rhe1 or Ne5.} ({The earlier continuation} 17.
c4 c5 18. Bf4 Bd6 19. Ne5 {(Geller-Hort, Skopje 1968) faded because of} Re7 $1
{(Gheorghiu-Hort, Olympiad, Lugano 1968).}) 17... Bd6 {(36) A difficult
choice: the longer I thought, the more obscure the way to equalise appeared.} (
17... Bf8 18. c4 {was no better (Balashov-Hübner, Wijk aan Zee 1982)}) ({and
again} 17... c5 $6 {was inappropriate in view of} 18. Bf4 Bd6 19. Bxd6 Qxd6 20.
dxc5 Qxc5 21. Rd3 {.}) 18. Rhe1 {White completes his development;} ({although} 
18. c4 {also suggests itself, with the idea of} e5 ({or} 18... c5 19. Bc3) 19.
Rhe1 {.}) 18... Nf6 {(24)} ({After} 18... e5 {in 'Informator' Geller
recommended} 19. dxe5 ({and I -} 19. Bc3 e4 20. Nh4 {(underestimating} Nf6 {)})
({although later in our opening monograph Shakarov and I suggested} 19. c4 $1 {
(I should add that if} e4 $6 {, then} 20. c5 {is strong).})) ({In the event of
} 18... Re7 19. c4 c5 20. Bc3 Nf6 21. Ne5 (21. dxc5 $5) 21... cxd4 {
(Kasparov-Vukic, Skara 1980) White retains an enduring plus with} 22. Bxd4 {.})
19. Ne5 c5 20. dxc5 $6 {Geller had also spent a lot of time in thought and he
was beginning to grow tired.} ({Otherwise he would have found the strong
manoeuvre} 20. Bc1 $1 {, of which I was afraid at the board, since I couldn't
see any clear response: I didn't want to exchange} Bxe5 ({while after} 20...
Nd5 21. c4 Nb4 22. a3 Nc6 23. Nxc6 Qxc6 24. Be3 {White has a small but
enduring advantage (if} Qe4+ 25. Qc2 {)}) 21. dxe5 {condemning my kingside to
a bind.}) 20... Bxe5 $1 {(5)} ({Apparently Geller was counting on exerting
pressure after} 20... Bxc5 21. f4 {, and he underestimated this reply: with a
temporary pawn sacrifice Black greatly simplifies the position.}) 21. Qxe5 Qxe5
22. Rxe5 Rd4 {(20) After another long think I did not make the best choice.} (
{After} 22... Ng4 $5 23. Re2 Rd5 {the draw would have been achieved without
any particular problems, for example:} 24. -- (24. Kc1 Red8 ({apparently} 24...
Rxh5 $5 25. f3 Nf6 26. b4 Rd8 {is simpler}) 25. f3 Ne5 26. Rf1 Rxc5 ({and now
not} 26... Nc4 {(?)} 27. Bc3 {'with an excellent game for White' (V.Khenkin} (
27. Bb4 $5 {)})) 27. Bc3 Nc6 28. Bxg7 ({or} 28. g4 Nd4) 28... Rxh5 {, and
Black is alright}) (24. b4 Red8 25. Kc1 a5 {(it is useful to exchange a pair
of pawns)} 26. a3 axb4 27. axb4 Rxh5 28. Bc3 Rxd1+ 29. Kxd1 Rf5 30. Ke1 g5 {
with equality.})) 23. Kc1 Red8 {(2)} 24. f3 Nd7 {(5)} ({White is also slightly
better after} 24... R8d5 25. Rxd5 Rxd5 26. g4 Rxc5 27. Bb4 {.}) 25. Ree1 ({My
'Informator' recommendation} 25. Re2 Nxc5 26. Rde1 {is harmless in view of}
R4d5 27. g4 R8d6 28. Bc3 f6 {etc.}) 25... Nxc5 26. Bc3 ({Geller suggested the
preparatory} 26. g4 {, but after} Na4 27. Ba5 b6 28. Rxd4 Rxd4 29. Bd2 Rd6 {no
achievements for White are apparent.}) ({Perhaps it was slightly better to play
} 26. Be3 $5 {(to hinder a potential ...g7-g6)} Rxd1+ 27. Rxd1 Rxd1+ 28. Kxd1
Nd7 29. g4 a6 30. Ke2 {, retaining a small plus, although here too Black
should be able to hold the position.}) 26... Rxd1+ {(3)} 27. Rxd1 Rxd1+ 28.
Kxd1 f6 29. Bb4 ({In the event of} 29. Ke2 {(Geller)} Kc7 {and if} 30. Bb4 {
Black has} Kc6 {.}) 29... Nd7 30. Ke2 {The trumps of White's position are
almost worthless.} ({Thus if} 30. Be7 $5 {(trying not to allow the black king
across to 'its' wing), then} f5 $1 31. Ke2 Nf6 32. Bxf6 gxf6 {is good, with a
probable draw.}) 30... Kd8 $1 {(a sound plan)} 31. g4 (31. Bd6 Ke8 ({or} 31...
f5 32. g4 Ke8 {.})) 31... Ke8 32. f4 $6 ({The last chance of fighting for an
advantage was} 32. Ke3 Kf7 33. Kf4 (33. Bd6 f5 $1) {, but after} 33... Nb6 34.
Be1 Nd5+ 35. Ke4 {Black would be saved by} f5+ $1 36. gxf5 Nf6+ 37. Ke5 exf5 {
and ...Nxh5. Because of the undermining move ...f6-f5 and the weakness of the
h5-pawn, White would not have time to create a passed pawn on the queenside
and exploit the advantage of bishop over knight.}) 32... Kf7 33. Bd2 ({Of
course, not} 33. f5 $2 Ne5 {. Geller was hoping to immobilise Black's kingside
and then set about creating a passed pawn on the queenside.}) 33... g6 $1 {(4)
An unpleasant surprise: Black is threatening to seize the initiative.} ({There
was an acceptable, but passive alternative:} 33... f5 34. g5 g6 35. hxg6+ Kxg6
36. gxh6 Kxh6 37. Be3 a6 38. Bd4 Kh5 39. Kf3 b5 {etc.}) 34. f5 $1 {In his
traditional time-trouble Yefim Petrovich is equal to the occasion!} ({White
could no longer delay this advance: if} 34. hxg6+ $2 Kxg6 35. f5+ exf5 36.
gxf5+ Kxf5 37. Bxh6 Ke4 {he has a very difficult position}) ({and also after} 
34. Bc3 f5 $1 35. gxf5 exf5 36. hxg6+ Kxg6 {only Black has winning chances.})
34... g5 ({It made sense to create a passed pawn -} 34... exf5 $5 35. gxf5 gxh5
36. Bxh6 Ne5 {, when a certain accuracy would still have been required of
White. Now, however, complete calm ensues.}) 35. Bc3 Nb6 {(5)} (35... exf5 36.
gxf5 Ne5 37. b3 Ke7 38. Bb4+ Kd7 $1 {(} 39. Bf8 Ke8 {) was also convincing.})
36. Bd4 Nc8 37. Kf3 b6 38. fxe6+ Kxe6 39. c4 Ne7 40. Bc3 (40. c5 Nc6 $1 {.})
40... f5 {(5)} 41. Bg7 Ng8 {Here the game was adjourned, and before sealing
his secret move, Geller offered me a draw. However, this was politely declined.
The eminent grandmaster was very unhappy about this, but I wondered whether
Black might be able to 'latch on' to the weak h5-pawn. --- Home analysis
showed that after any sensible reply by the opponent, including the sealed move
} 42. b4 {, my chances of success were short-lived. And we agreed a draw
without resuming the game, this time on the proposal of Black.} 1/2-1/2

[Event "30: 46th USSR Championship, Tbilisi"]
[Site "?"]
[Date "1978.12.06"]
[Round "4"]
[White "Kasparov, G."]
[Black "Polugayevsky, L."]
[Result "1-0"]
[ECO "B43"]
[Annotator "Garry Kasparov"]
[PlyCount "91"]
[EventDate "1978.??.??"]
[Source "Everyman Chess"]
[SourceDate "2012.11.28"]

{In the 2nd round I had White against my compatriot, grandmaster Vladimir
Bagirov. The first tournament encounter with the long-standing leader of the
Azerbaijan team! My opponent also chose the Caro-Kann, but with 4...Nd7. In a
slightly better position, on the 18th move I did not risk sacrificing my
knight on e6 and I castled kingside, which led to simplification and a quick
draw. Later we spent a long time analysing the game in the players' room, and
this was described in the sports press: 'Ex-world champion Mikhail Tal leaned
over Garik and with unfeigned admiration in his voice commented on the
variations he was demonstrating - "one more biting than the other". And
everything reduced to the fact that these variations "ended in Bagirov being
mated, or completely crushed". One of the grandmasters standing alongside
quietly remarked that "White should have sacrificed the piece" and asked the
youngster why he didn't do this. Garik replied seriously: "There were too many
variations. I couldn't calculate them all." To this Tal instantly responded
with his disarming smile: "You should first sacrifice, and then calculate".'
--- The knight sacrifice did indeed look very promising (it was only many
years later that the sole defence for Black was found, one that none of us had
seen). And I reproached myself for my excessive timidity in relation to the
experts, especially since the move earlier I could have played 17 Bc4, in
order to sacrifice not the knight, but the bishop on e6. Bagirov, by contrast,
was happy with the result of the game and he even prophetically stated: 'The
time will come when everyone will regard a draw with this boy as a blessing...
' --- In the 3rd round I made a quiet draw with Black against Makarychev -
this also quite satisfied my opponent. And in the 4th round I was paired
against one of the tournament favourites, Lev Polugayevsky, many times a
participant in the Candidates matches, who had also started with three draws.
A few years earlier we had met in a clock simultaneous, but never one-to-one.} 
1. e4 c5 2. Nf3 e6 ({Polugayevsky prepared seriously for the game, and instead
of his patent but dangerous variation in the Najdorf (} 2... d6 3. d4 cxd4 4.
Nxd4 Nf6 5. Nc3 a6 6. Bg5 e6 7. f4 b5 $5 {) he decided to choose a reserve
weapon - the Paulsen Variation. As he himself explained: 'Why should I do that
which is expected of me?'}) 3. d4 cxd4 4. Nxd4 a6 5. Nc3 {(5)} ({In the 21st
Century I tried} 5. c4 Nf6 6. Nc3 Qc7 ({the new fashion instead of} 6... Bb4)
7. a3 {- against Kramnik (2nd match game, Moscow 2001), Vallejo and Ivanchuk 
(Linares 2002).}) 5... Qc7 ({Also avoiding the variation} 5... b5 6. Bd3 {,
which in the mid-1960s occurred in my opponent's games, and in the late-1990s
in mine.}) 6. Be2 {(4)} b5 ({Here it is, the opening surprise of the
experienced fighter: my basic preparation for White was mainly directed against
} 6... Nf6) ({or} 6... Nc6 {.}) 7. Bf3 {(14) A solid move, but rather an
awkward one;} ({and less energetic compared with} 7. O-O {, as I played later:}
-- (7... b4 8. Na4 Bb7 9. c3 $5 {a sharp pawn sacrifice;} (9. Bf3 Bd6 10. e5 $5
{is also interesting, Efimenko-Volokitin, Bundesliga 2007}) 9... Nf6 (9... Bxe4
10. Bf3 ({or} 10. Be3 $5) 10... Nf6 11. Bg5) 10. cxb4 Bxb4 11. Be3 {, and
White has good prospects (Kasparov-Topalov, 4th rapid match game, Sofia 1998)})
(7... Bb7 8. Re1 $1 Nc6 ({after} 8... b4 $6 {I long ago devised a knight
sacrifice -} 9. Nd5 $1) 9. Nxc6 dxc6 10. e5 $1 Ne7 (10... Qxe5 $2 {is weak
because of} 11. Bh5 $1 Qd6 12. Bxf7+ $1) ({in this topical line} 10... Rd8 11.
Bd3 c5) ({or the more recent} 10... Bb4 {is not so clear}) 11. Bd3 Ng6 ({or} 
11... Rd8 12. Bg5 h6 13. Qh5 {, Kamsky-Lutz, Dortmund 1993}) 12. Qh5 {with the
initiative (Kasparov-Ye Jiangchuan, Batumi (rapid) 2001).}) (7... Nc6 8. Nxc6
dxc6 9. Bg5 $6 {Anand-Leko, Dortmund 1996.})) 7... Bb7 ({The alternative is} 
7... Nc6 8. Nxc6 dxc6 {, and if} 9. O-O Bd6 {.}) 8. O-O (8. Qe2 {is no better:}
Nc6 (8... b4 9. Nd5 $5) 9. Nxc6 dxc6 10. e5 Ne7 {with equality (Tal-Gheorghiu,
Moscow Interzonal 1982).}) 8... Nc6 9. Nxc6 {(5)} dxc6 $1 ({After} 9... Bxc6 $6
{Black has to reckon with the typical sacrifice} 10. Nd5 $1 {, which promises
White an obvious advantage:} exd5 ({or} 10... Bxd5 11. exd5 Rc8 12. c3 Nf6 {
(Barua-Bischoff, Calcutta 1997)} 13. g3 $1 Be7 (13... Bd6 14. Bg5) 14. Re1 {
etc.}) 11. exd5 Bb7 12. Re1+ Kd8 13. d6 $1 Bxd6 14. Bxb7 Bxh2+ 15. Kh1 Qxb7 16.
Kxh2 {(Crouch).}) 10. e5 $5 {(35) This unclear pawn sacrifice was a novelty,
devised after agonising hesitation at the board.} ({I very much wanted to
activate my bishop on f3. In the old game Estrin-Polugayevsky (Moscow 1964)
after} 10. a4 Bd6 11. axb5 (11. g3 Nf6 {is equal}) 11... cxb5 12. e5 Bxe5 13.
Nxb5 axb5 14. Rxa8+ Bxa8 15. Bxa8 Bxh2+ $5 ({the equalising} 15... Nf6 16. h3
O-O {is more modest, Nisipeanu-Ivanchuk, Khanty-Mansiysk (rapid) 2007}) 16. Kh1
Bd6 17. Qd3 b4 18. Rd1 Ke7 19. Be3 Nf6 20. Ra1 Bc5 21. Qc4 Rc8 {White did not
gain full compensation for the pawn.}) 10... Qxe5 (10... b4 {is hardly any
better:} 11. Ne4 (11. Na4 $5) 11... Qxe5 12. c3 $5 {(Stohl).}) 11. Re1 Qc7 ({
In the event of} 11... Qd6 {(Barle-Miles, Bled/Portoroz 1979) the black queen
comes under attack with gain of tempo:} 12. Qe2 Nf6 13. a4 $1 b4 14. Ne4 Nxe4
15. Qxe4 Qc7 (15... O-O-O 16. Be3 $1) 16. Bf4 Bd6 17. Bxd6 Qxd6 {
(Hambardzumian-Alvarado, Najdorf Memorial 2007)} 18. Rad1 $1 {with excellent
compensation for the pawn.}) 12. Bh5 $1 {(11) Creating the threat of Rxe6+.} (
{The less vigorous} 12. a4 Nf6 13. axb5 axb5 14. Rxa8+ Bxa8 15. Nxb5 cxb5 16.
Bxa8 Bd6 17. g3 O-O 18. Bg2 b4 19. Bg5 Be5 {leads to equality 
(Velimirovic-Rublevsky, Herzeg Novi 1999).}) 12... Be7 $1 {My opponent also
sharply reduced his speed of decision-taking - he had plenty to think about.
It is clear that Black has to return the pawn, but he would like to find the
best way of doing this.} ({Let us consider the other possible replies:} 12...
g6 $2 13. Qd4 f6 14. Rxe6+ Kf7 15. Bf4 c5 16. Qe3 Qd7 17. Bg4 f5 18. Re1 fxg4
19. Ne4 {with a very strong attack}) (12... Bc8 $2 {(a strange
'Steinitz-style' recommendation by Crouch)} 13. Ne4 $1 Be7 (13... g6 14. Bf3)
14. Qf3 Nf6 ({or} 14... g6 15. Qc3 e5 16. Bf3 {, and Black is in trouble}) 15.
Bf4) (12... Rd8 13. Rxe6+ Be7 14. Qf3 g6 15. Bf4 $1 {(Stohl)} Qd7 16. Re3 $5 c5
$1 ({not} 16... gxh5 $2 17. Qxh5 c5 18. Rae1) 17. Bg4 Bxf3 18. Bxd7+ Kxd7 19.
Rxf3 Kc6 20. Re1 {, retaining pressure in the endgame}) (12... Ne7 13. Qf3 ({
after} 13. Rxe6 g6 $1 14. Re4 ({or} 14. Ne4 fxe6) 14... Rd8 15. Qe2 c5 16. Bf4
Qb6 {no way to gain an advantage is apparent}) 13... Ng6 14. Qh3 Bc8 $1 {
(Crouch)} 15. a4 $1 b4 16. Bxg6 fxg6 17. Ne4 Be7 (17... e5 $6 18. Qb3) 18. Bg5
$1 {with the initiative}) (12... Nf6 $5 13. Rxe6+ Be7 {, transposing into a
position which could have arisen in the game - cf. the note to Black's next
move.}) 13. Rxe6 {(6)} g6 {This at first sight strong reply (Black is
threatening to win material) gives White new possibilities.} ({The developing} 
13... Nf6 {was safer, after which I was intending to fight for the initiative
with the unexpected move} 14. Ne4 $1 {.} -- ({. Thus, in the event of} 14...
O-O $6 {there is the unpleasant} 15. Nxf6+ Bxf6 16. Rxf6 $1 gxf6 17. Bh6 ({or} 
17. Qg4+ Kh8 18. Bd2 {.})) ({. Instead,} 14... Nxh5 15. Qxh5 O-O 16. Bf4 Qd7 {
is correct, when White is at a crossroads:} 17. -- (17. Re5 f6 $1 ({but not} 
17... Rad8 $6 18. Re1 Bb4 $2 19. Nf6+ $1 gxf6 20. Rg5+ $1 {with a spectacular
mate, Gild.Garcia-Zapata, Medellin 1992}) 18. Rd1 Qe8 19. Nd6 (19. Nxf6+ $6
gxf6 20. Qg4+ Kh8 21. Rd7 $1 fxe5 $1 22. Bxe5+ Rf6 23. Rxb7 Qf7 {- Stohl})
19... Qxh5 20. Rxh5 Rad8 {with equality}) (17. Ng5 $1 Bxg5 $1 (17... h6 $6 18.
Rd1 Qe8 $2 19. Rxh6 $1 {, and wins - Crouch}) 18. Rd6 $1 Qf5 19. Qxg5 Qxg5 20.
Bxg5 c5 (20... Rfe8 21. Rd7) 21. Be3 c4 22. f3 {- White has somewhat the
better endgame, but in view of the opposite-colour bishops a draw is the most
probable result.}))) 14. Re1 $2 {(34) An important moment in the game, not
mentioned by the commentators.} ({Alas, despite the time spent, I missed} 14.
Re4 $1 {with the idea of Bf4 - this would have set Black difficult problems:}
-- (14... gxh5 $2 15. Bf4 $1 Qd7 16. Qxh5 Nf6 17. Qe5 $1 Qe6 18. Rae1 Rf8 19.
Qc7 $1 Nxe4 20. Nxe4 Rd8 {- Black is a rook ahead, but after} 21. h3 $1 {(an
escape square!) he loses his queen:} Ba8 ({or} 21... f5 22. Nd6+ Rxd6 23. Rxe6
Rxe6 24. Qxb7 {with a decisive material advantage}) 22. Re3 {and Nd6+}) (14...
c5 15. Bf4 $1 Qd8 $1 ({after} 15... Qd7 $6 16. Qxd7+ Kxd7 17. Bg4+ f5 18. Rd1+
Ke8 19. Ree1 {White has powerful pressure}) 16. Qe2 $5 (16. Re3 b4 $1 17. Bf3 (
{or} 17. Qe2 gxh5 18. Rd1 Qb6 {is unclear}) 17... Qxd1+ 18. Nxd1 Bxf3 19. Rxf3
f5 {and ...Nf6}) 16... gxh5 17. Rd1 Qb6 18. Rd6 Qa5 19. Re3 Rd8 $1 (19... b4 $6
{is weak in view of} 20. Nd5 Bxd5 21. Rxd5 Qxa2 22. Rd1 $1) 20. Qxh5 b4 21. Ne4
Bxe4 22. Rxe4 {with splendid compensation for the piece}) (14... Rd8 $1 {(the
immediate inclusion of the rook eases the defence)} 15. Qe2 c5 16. Bf4 Qb6 17.
Bf3 $1 Bxe4 18. Nxe4 {with sufficient initiative for the exchange (} Kf8 19.
Re1 ({or} 19. a4 {). Thus my sacrifice of pawn and bishop was completely
correct, and only the faulty rook retreat to e1 casts doubts on it.}))) 14...
Rd8 $2 {Timidly played, and after a long think.} ({Immediately after the game
I asked my opponent why he hadn't taken the bishop -} 14... gxh5 $1 15. -- ({
, and the grandmaster candidly admitted that} 15. Qd4 f6 16. -- (16. Qd1 {
seemed dangerous to him - 'the king is rather weak...'. Gufeld, who was
standing alongside, picturesquely exclaimed: 'Are we hearing this from the
author of the Polugayevsky Variation?!' Indeed, after} Rd8 $1 ({this is safer
than Timman's move} 16... b4) 17. Qxh5+ Kf8 {with the intention of ...c6-c5 
(and if} 18. Be3 {there is also} Bc8 {) Black would have parried the attack,
retaining his extra piece and every chance of winning.}) ({. Instead of 16 Qd1
it is possible to play} 16. Bf4 c5 $1 17. Qe3 Qc6 18. Qh3 {, and here} Kf8 ({
but the accurate} 18... b4 $1 19. Ne4 Rd8 {secures Black's advantage}) 19. Re6
Qe8 20. Rb6 $1 Bc8 {(Crouch)} 21. Qf3 {etc. leads to a sharp game.})) ({. What
then should be done after the capture of the bishop? White loses after} 15.
Qxh5 $2 O-O-O) ({, and} 15. Bg5 c5 {(Stohl) does not look any good.}) ({. In
the game Wojtkiewicz-Ionov (Yurmala 1980) White made the attempt} 15. Ne4 -- ({
, and after} 15... Kf8 $2 16. Qd4 $2 ({but by} 16. Qxh5 h6 $1 {(Sveshnikov)}
17. b3 $1 {and Bb2 he would have achieved a good game}) 16... f6 17. Nc5 Bc8
18. Bf4 Qd8 19. Qe3 Qd5 20. b4 Bxc5 21. bxc5 Bd7 $1 {he was left empty-handed.}
) ({. True, Black too could have played more strongly -} 15... c5 $1 {(Stohl)}
16. Nd6+ Kf8 17. Nxb7 Qxb7 18. Qxh5 Rd8 $1 {with hopes of converting the extra
piece.}) (15... Rd8 $6 16. Qf3 $1 c5 17. Bf4 {is unclear.}))) 15. Qf3 {Now the
position is again one of dynamic balance.} c5 ({Here too} 15... gxh5 {was
possible, although in their time both Speelman and Crouch condemned this
capture because of} 16. Bf4 {'followed by Be5'.} -- ({. And indeed,} 16... Qc8
$2 17. Be5 c5 18. Ne4 $1 {is nightmarish for Black}) ({, while in the event of
} 16... Qd7 $6 17. Qxh5 $1 c5 18. Be5 $1 (18. Rad1 Qc6 19. Rxd8+ Kxd8 20. f3
Ke8 $1 21. Qe5 Qe6 $1 22. Qb8+ Qc8 {is equal}) 18... Qc6 $1 19. f3 Nf6 20. Qh6
Kd7 $1 (20... Rg8 $2 21. Bxf6 Rxg2+ 22. Kh1 $1 {- Stohl}) 21. Bg3 $1 {(with
the threat of Rxe7+!) Black has to fight to survive:} Nd5 $1 22. Qxc6+ Bxc6 (
22... Kxc6 $5 23. Nxd5 Bg5 $1) 23. Rad1 Bf6 $1 ({not Crouch's variation} 23...
Ke8 $2 24. Bh4 {and wins}) 24. Nxd5 Bxd5 25. Rxd5+ Kc6 26. Rf5 Bxb2 27. Rxf7 b4
{etc.}) ({. However,} 16... Qb6 {is safer, not fearing either} 17. Be5 ({or} 
17. Qg3 c5 {transposing into a position from the game}) 17... c5 18. Qxh5 Nf6
19. Qh6 Kd7 $1 20. Qh3+ Ke8 {, when White has only a draw by repetition -} 21.
Qh6 {.})) 16. Bf4 $1 {I think that Polugayevsky had underestimated this move.}
Qb6 ({Black would like to simplify the position -} 16... Bxf3 {(?)} 17. Bxc7
Bxh5 18. Bxd8 Kxd8 {, but after} 19. f3 $1 {the bishop at h5 is trapped and he
is literally one move short of being able to free it:} g5 ({or} 19... f5 20.
Rad1+ Ke8 (20... Kc8 21. Nd5 $1 {- Crouch}) 21. Rd6 Kf8 22. Rxa6 Bh4 23. Ra8+
Kf7 24. Re2 {and wins}) 20. Rad1+ Kc8 (20... Ke8 21. Rd6 {- Timman}) 21. Nd5
Bd6 22. Nb6+ $1 Kc7 23. Re8) ({Crouch drew attention to the possibility of} 
16... Qd7 {, intending} 17. Bg4 ({but Black may have been frightened by the
irrational continuation} 17. Qg3 $5 gxh5 18. Qg7 Qg4 19. Be5 $1) 17... Bxf3 18.
Bxd7+ Kxd7 19. gxf3 Kc6 {with equality.}) 17. Qg3 gxh5 18. Bc7 $1 {(5)} ({Of
course, not} 18. Be5 $2 Nf6 $1 19. Bc7 (19. Qf4 Kd7 $1) 19... Qc6 20. Bxd8 Rg8
$1 {and wins (Timman)}) ({or} 18. Qg7 $2 Qg6 $1 (18... Qf6 $4 19. Rxe7+ $1 Kxe7
20. Bg5) 19. Rxe7+ Nxe7 $1 20. Qxh8+ Kd7 21. Rd1+ Bd5 22. Qxd8+ Kxd8 23. Nxd5
Nf5 $1 24. c3 Kc8 {, and White cannot hold the position.}) 18... Qg6 {The only
move. Already both players had used most of their time on the clock, and the
rest took place in a time scramble.} 19. Bxd8 Qxg3 20. hxg3 Kxd8 21. Rad1+ Kc7
22. Nd5+ Bxd5 23. Rxd5 {In this ending, which has arisen by force, in contrast
to the variation with 16...Bxf3 the white rooks do not have their knight
assistant, and hence there are no mating threats. It only remains for Black to
complete his development.} h6 $1 24. Rxh5 Rh7 {Now the bishop can be moved
from e7 and the sleeping knight brought into play. --- Material is roughly
equal - rook and pawn against bishop and knight, but in addition the black
pawns are targets for the rooks. At the board I optimistically reckoned that
my chances, at the least, were not worse.} 25. Rhe5 {(5)} (25. a4 $5 {was also
interesting:} b4 26. Kf1 Rg7 27. Rf5 Kc6 28. b3 Bf6 29. Re8 Bd4 30. Ra8 Kb6 31.
Rf8 {with equality.}) 25... Kd7 {Aiming for safety in time-trouble.} ({The
immediate} 25... Bd6 $5 {was more logical.}) 26. R5e3 {(3)} Rg7 27. Rd3+ Kc7
28. Ra3 Rg6 29. Rf3 (29. Rf3 {after this I offered a draw, having in mind the
repetition of moves -} Rg7 30. Ra3 {. However, instead of replying the
grandmaster moved his bishop. Incidentally, in my next game with Polugayevsky,
in the USSR Team Championship (Moscow 1979), in a similar position I also
offered a draw, and on this occasion my opponent replied that he wanted to
'play on for a bit', but - he again lost.}) 29... Bf6 $6 {This is not yet a
mistake, and yet it plays into White's hands, allowing him to activate his
rooks.} 30. c3 $1 (30. Re8 Bxb2 31. Rxf7+ Kd6 32. Ra7 Kd5 {with equality -
Stohl.}) 30... Kd7 31. Rd3+ Kc7 32. Re8 {Here Polugayevsky grew nervous,
evidently regretting that he had allowed the enemy rook into his camp.
Meanwhile, the playing time was rapidly expiring: for the last moves to the
time control we had literally seconds remaining...} Ne7 $2 ({By bringing back
his bishop -} 32... Be7 $1 {, Black could then have activated his knight in
time and maintained the balance by dynamic play:} 33. Ra8 (33. Rf3 Rg7) ({, or
} 33. b3 Bd6 34. Ra8 Nf6 35. Rxa6 Ng4 36. Ra7+ (36. Rd1 Rf6) 36... Kb6 37. Rxf7
Ne5 38. Rg7 Rxg7 39. Rxd6+ {and Rxh6, with three pawns for a piece and a
probable draw}) 33... c4 34. Ra7+ Kb6 35. Rdd7 Re6 36. b4 Bd6 37. Rdb7+ Kc6 38.
Rxf7 Nf6 39. Rxa6+ Kd5 40. Kf1 Ne4 {with equality (Crouch).}) 33. Red8 Nc6 $6 {
With his flag about to fall, Black becomes rattled.} ({His position is already
very unpleasant - say,} 33... Bg5 $6 34. f4 Bf6 35. R8d7+ Kc8 36. Kh2 $1) ({or
} 33... c4 $6 34. R3d7+ Kc6 35. Rd6+ Kc5 36. Rxa6 {.}) ({However,} 33... Nc8 $5
{was more resilient:} 34. R8d7+ Kc6 35. Rxf7 b4 36. f4 $1 Nd6 (36... c4 $2 37.
f5 $1) 37. Ra7 Bd8 $1 ({but not} 37... Kb6 $6 38. Rxa6+ $1 Kxa6 39. Rxd6+ Kb7
40. f5 Kc7 41. Re6 $1) 38. Rxa6+ Bb6 39. cxb4 Kb5 40. Rxb6+ Kxb6 41. bxc5+ Kxc5
42. Kh2 {- four pawns for the knight guarantee White the advantage, but it is
still a long way from a win.}) 34. R8d7+ Kb6 35. Rxf7 Be7 36. Re3 {(3)} Bd6 37.
f4 c4 38. Kh2 ({I saw the more vigorous move} 38. f5 $1 {with the possible
sequel} Rg8 39. Re6 Rd8 40. Rff6 Kc5 41. Rxh6 {, winning, but in the time
scramble I didn't want to spoil anything before the adjournment and I played
as solidly as possible.}) 38... Bc5 39. Re2 b4 ({The waiting move} 39... Bd6 {
is hardly any better - objectively Black has little hope of saving the game.})
40. Re4 $1 {Depriving the opponent of counterplay.} bxc3 ({To Stohl's move} 
40... b3 {there is the strong reply} 41. a4 $1 {.}) 41. bxc3 Bf2 {Alas, the
g3- and c4-pawns are not of equal value.} 42. Rxc4 ({Again} 42. f5 $5 {was
more energetic, for example:} Bxg3+ 43. Kh3 Rg5 44. Rxc4 Bd6 45. Rf6 Kc7 46. g4
h5 47. Kh4 Rxg4+ 48. Rxg4 hxg4 49. Kxg4 Ne5+ 50. Kh5 {with a quick win. ---
Here the game was adjourned. From the press: 'According to Botvinnik's
preliminary assessment, White has good winning chances.' The adjournment
session took place only after the 6th round.}) 42... Bxg3+ {The sealed move.}
43. Kh3 Be1 44. a4 $1 {The crux of the straightforward home analysis: the
black king is deprived of the b5-square, so that it cannot drive the rook from
c4, and now g2-g4 and f4-f5 is threatened.} Na5 ({Things are also dismal for
Black after} 44... h5 {(Stohl)} 45. Rf5 $1 h4 46. Rg5) ({or} 44... Rg3+ 45. Kh2
Rg6 ({no better is} 45... Rxc3 46. Rxc3 Bxc3 47. g4) ({or, as pointed out by
Stohl,} 45... Rd3 46. g4 $1 Bxc3 47. Rh7) 46. g4 Rd6 47. Kg2 Bh4 48. Kf3 {etc.}
) 45. Rb4+ {(4)} Kc5 $2 {Blundering a piece. It is probable that Polugayevsky
no longer believed it was possible to save the game (especially after 44 a4).
At any event, when I replied 46 Rf5+, he stopped the clocks without any
visible sign of vexation.} ({It is amusing that, after} 45... Kc6 46. -- ({,
'64', Shakhmaty v SSSR and 'Informator' all gave one and the same 'way to win'
-} 46. Rf5 {(?)} Bxc3 {(?)} ({Stohl and a computer easily refuted this
variation by} 46... Rg3+ 47. Kh2 Rxc3 $1 48. Rxa5 Bg3+ 49. Kh3 Be1+ 50. Kg4
Rg3+ 51. Kf5 Bxb4 {with a draw (} 52. Rxa6+ Kd7 {etc.)}) 47. Rxa5 {with the
idea of} Bxb4 48. Rxa6+) ({. In fact White has at least two completely safe
ways to the goal:} 46. Rb1 -- (46... Re6 47. f5 Re3+ 48. Kg4 Bxc3 49. Ra7 {
(Stohl)}) ({, or} 46... Rg3+ 47. Kh2 Re3 48. Rf6+ $1 ({Stohl's move} 48. g4 {
is parried by Crouch's reply} Nc4 $1) 48... Kc7 49. f5 $1 Bg3+ (49... Bxc3 50.
Rxh6) 50. Kg1 Bd6 51. Rxh6 Nc4 52. f6 Nd2 {and now not Crouch's move} 53. f7 {
(?)} ({but} 53. Rd1 $1 Bc5 54. Kh2 Bd6+ 55. Kh1 Re6 56. g4 Ne4 57. Kg2 Rxf6 58.
Rxf6 Nxf6 59. g5 {and wins}) 53... Bc5 $1 {with a draw.}) (46... Bxc3 $2 47.
Rc1 {.})) (46. Rb8 Rg3+ 47. Kh2 Rxc3 ({or} 47... Re3 48. Rf6+ (48. g4 $5) 48...
Kc7 {(d5)} 49. Rg8 {followed by Rxh6 etc.}) 48. Rc8+ Kd5 49. Rxc3 Bxc3 50. Ra7
{.})) 46. Rf5+ {. Times: 2.35-2.44. --- From the press: 'Kasparov's first win
over one of the strongest players in the world'. --- An uneven, but
interesting and very tense game, with an original treatment of the opening. It
was and still remains an object of my pride. --- Nikitin: 'The fight is
intensifying with every round. At times the hall in the Chess Palace resembles
an agitated beehive, and then a brightly flashing sign "Quiet!" helps to
restore order. In this difficult situation the young Kasparov feels very much
at home. He has already adapted, and become acquainted with his rivals - in
short, he has become a man on the stage.' --- Viktor Khenkin: 'It somehow
turned out that the 15-year-old master was not only immediately taken
seriously, but they also began to be afraid of him. The Odessa player Tukmakov,
playing White against him in the 5th round, so diligently exchanged the pieces,
that a draw became inevitable as early as the 21st move. "Out of harm's way",
the grandmaster explained his tactics. But Garik is aiming for a fight; he
needs to gain in strength, and test himself.'} 1-0

[Event "31: 46th USSR Championship, Tbilisi"]
[Site "?"]
[Date "1978.12.08"]
[Round "6"]
[White "Kasparov, G."]
[Black "Kuzmin, G."]
[Result "1-0"]
[ECO "C97"]
[Annotator "Garry Kasparov"]
[PlyCount "81"]
[EventDate "1978.??.??"]
[Source "Everyman Chess"]
[SourceDate "2012.11.28"]

{In the 6th round I played another strong Ukrainian grandmaster - Gennady
Kuzmin, twice a prize-winner in USSR Championships and a participant in
Interzonal Tournaments. The successful start had given me confidence, and
before a game with another chess authority I no longer experienced any
timidity (especially since our two previous games in simultaneous displays had
ended in draws).} 1. e4 e5 2. Nf3 Nc6 3. Bb5 a6 4. Ba4 Nf6 5. O-O (5. d4 {-
Game No.1.}) 5... Be7 6. Re1 b5 7. Bb3 d6 8. c3 O-O 9. h3 Na5 10. Bc2 c5 11. d4
Qc7 12. d5 {(6)} ({My knowledge in the main lines of the Chigorin Variation -} 
12. Nbd2 -- (12... cxd4 13. cxd4 Nc6 ({or} 13... Bb7 {- was as yet
insufficient, and I immediately closed the centre})) ({, since here I had some
slight but pleasant experience (} 12... c4 $6 13. b4 $1 {- Game No.14).}))
12... Nc4 ({An alternative is} 12... Bd7 13. b3 ({if} 13. Nbd2 {, then} g6 ({or
} 13... c4 {with the idea of ...Nb7-c5}) 14. Nf1 Nh5) 13... Nb7 14. c4 b4 15.
Nbd2 Ne8 {(Rubinstein's old plan)} 16. Nf1 g6 17. Bh6 Ng7 18. g4 f6 19. Ng3 {
½-½ (Kasparov-Matanovic, Banja Luka 1979). The draw secured me victory in
the tournament, otherwise I would have played on:} Nd8 20. Qd2 Nf7 21. Be3 {
etc.}) ({The immediate} 12... Ne8 {is also possible, for example:} 13. b3 Nb7
14. Nbd2 g6 15. a4 Rb8 16. axb5 axb5 17. Nf1 Ng7 {followed by ...f7-f6 and ...Nd8-f7 (Sion Castro-Beliavsky, Leon 1994).}) 13. a4 $1 {(12)} Bd7 14. b3 Na5 ({
In my view, this is better than} 14... Nb6 15. a5 Nc8 16. -- ({, which gives
White somewhat the better chances after both} 16. b4 c4 17. Nbd2 {
(Kasparov-Ivanchuk, Prague (rapid) 2002)}) ({, and} 16. c4 $5 g6 ({or} 16... b4
17. Nbd2 {(Adams-Kasimdzhanov, 5th match game, Tripoli 2004)}) 17. Nc3 Nh5 18.
Ne2 {(Topalov-Shirov, Linares 2004).})) 15. axb5 {(7)} axb5 16. Nbd2 Nb7 ({The
'bad' knight should not have been moved away immediately (nor in the variation
} 16... c4 17. b4 Nb7 18. Bb2 {).}) ({It was more logical to play} 16... Rfb8)
({or} 16... g6 17. Nf1 Nh5 18. Bh6 Rfe8 {(Psakhis-G.Kuzmin, Krasnoyarsk 1980).}
) 17. Bb2 g6 ({Now if} 17... c4 {, apart from} 18. b4 {,} ({there is also} 18.
bxc4 bxc4 19. Ba3 {with play against the c4-pawn.})) 18. c4 {(5)} Nh5 $2 (18...
b4 {was correct (and if} 19. Nh2 Nh5 {), maintaining a closed and quite
tolerable position.}) 19. cxb5 $1 {(4)} Bxb5 20. Nc4 {Unexpectedly the knight
has acquired an excellent post;} (20. Nc4 {since the exchange} Bxc4 $2 21. bxc4
{is unacceptable for Black in view of the invasion of the white bishop via a4.
White has an easy game - his next few moves are obvious, whereas Black's
knight at b7 is a big headache: in this half-open position it is not easy to
bring it back to life - he lacks time and space.}) 20... f6 {Kuzmin is relying
on the typical idea of ...Rfb8 and ...Nd8-f7, but here this does not help.} ({
After} 20... Ng7 $6 21. -- ({, in 'Informator' I gave} 21. Nfxe5 dxe5 22. Bxe5
{, but after} Bd6 {it is only a question of compensation for the piece -} 23.
Nxd6 Nxd6 24. Bb2 {, etc.}) (21. Qd2 $1 {is far stronger, and in the event of}
f5 $2 {there is the decisive} 22. Rxa8 Rxa8 23. exf5 Nxf5 ({or} 23... gxf5 24.
Nfxe5 $1 (24. Qh6 $5) 24... dxe5 25. Bxe5 Bd6 26. Nxd6 Nxd6 27. Qf4 {followed
by Re3}) 24. Bxf5 gxf5 25. Ncxe5 $1 {.})) (20... Bf6 $5 {was perhaps the
lesser evil, temporarily 'forgetting' about the fate of the knight on b7,
although all the same Black would have faced a depressing and passive defence.}
) 21. Qd2 Rfb8 22. Bc3 Bf8 (22... Nd8 {is more consistent, when} 23. g3 Nf7 24.
h4 {is good, retaining unpleasant pressure.}) 23. Nh2 {(7)} Nf4 {This proves
to be a blank shot.} 24. Ng4 {(6)} Bg7 {It is not clear what Black has
achieved by switching his bishop from e7 to g7. Most probably he has simply
lost time, whereas White has gradually strengthened his position.} 25. h4 {(2)}
Qc8 26. Nge3 {(11)} Bxc4 {Kuzmin is no longer able to tolerate the knight on
c4.} ({If} 26... Rxa1 27. Rxa1 Ra8 {there could have followed} 28. Rxa8 Qxa8
29. g3 Nh5 30. Bd1 $5 {with the threat of Bxh5 or Bg4.}) 27. bxc4 Bh6 ({Also
after} 27... Nd8 28. g3 Nh5 {in various lines there is the attractive idea Bd1.
}) 28. Rxa8 {(21)} Rxa8 29. Bd1 $1 {Black's problems are continuing to
snowball. His two knights - both the 'bad' one and the 'good' one - are in a
kind of impasse.} Ra3 $6 {The final oversight in a very difficult position.} (
29... f5 $6 30. exf5 gxf5 31. Qc2 e4 {would have lost ignominiously to} 32. g4
$1 ({or even} 32. Bg4 $1)) ({but nevertheless} 29... Nd8 {was somewhat more
resilient.}) 30. g3 {(5)} Nh5 31. Qb2 {(4)} Qa8 {(alas, the control of the
a-file is of no importance)} 32. Bxh5 Bxe3 33. Rxe3 gxh5 34. Kg2 {The exchange
of a couple of pairs of minor pieces has not brought Black any relief. To his
'bad' knight has been added a catastrophic weakening of the pawns covering his
king.} Nd8 ({Black avoids the invasion of his position after} 34... Ra2 35. Qb5
Qc8 36. Be1 ({or} 36. Rf3 Kg7 37. Rf5) 36... Ra8 37. Rb3 Nd8 38. Qe8+ {etc.,
but he goes from the frying pan into the fire.}) 35. Qe2 $1 Nf7 36. Qxh5 Qa6
37. Rf3 {(2) Emphasising the hopelessness of the attempts by the opponent to
somehow divert White from the final attack.} Qb7 ({The black queen cannot move
far away from its king:} 37... Qxc4 38. Qg4+ Kf8 39. Rxf6 ({or} 39. Qc8+ Kg7
40. Qf5 {with crushing threats.})) 38. Qg4+ {(2)} Kf8 39. Qf5 Qe7 40. Qxh7 Ra4
41. Bd2 $1 {A timely inclusion of the bishop.} ({If} 41. Bd2 Rxc4 {, then} 42.
Bh6+ ({or the spectacular} 42. Bg5 $1 {. Times: 2.02-2.27.})) (41. -- {Not
the most brilliant game, but an important one in the competitive respect:
after it I burst into the leading trio (Beliavsky - 4½ out of 6, Kasparov
and Tal - 4), whereas the distraught Kuzmin was unable to find his form and in
the end he finished in last place. --- This lively start made me euphoric, and
I made a decision - I would stay in the Premier League! But here I was hit by
a cold shower - 'Black' losses to Timoshchenko and Razuvaev, and a 'White'
draw with Georgadze dampened my optimism. In the championship bulletin I read
the following dialogue: 'Should you be congratulated on winning against a
15-year-old schoolboy?' Yuri Razuvaev was asked. 'I think I should', the
Muscovite smiled in reply. 'This was probably my last chance of winning
against him.' Prophetic words! However, at the time this hint at my guaranteed
future was a faint consolation. --- 'Things became difficult for Kasparov',
wrote Nikitin in the Baku Sport newspaper. 'His place among the leaders after
the first six rounds, and the heightened attention of the spectators and
journalists, proved a difficult psychological test for the young master. He
became nervous and his play, although interesting, suffered from set-backs.
Garik should not be reproached for the fact that he fell behind the leaders.
He will no doubt play many times in the Premier League, and for him this
tournament was an invaluable school of chess knowledge.'}) (41. -- {But
fortune again smiled on me. In the 10th round I scored a difficult win over
Beliavsky (in the adjourned position he resigned without resuming), in the
11th I adjourned with winning chances against Gulko, and in the 12th I gained
a powerful position against Mikhalchishin. At this point I pictured myself
finishing in the dizzy heights of the top three! Then retribution followed
swiftly. In my excitement I messed up the game with Mikhalchishin and lost!
That evening, a tragic one for me, was captured in his report by the Soviet
sport correspondent Viktor Vasiliev: 'Five rounds before the finish Garik
could have been in the leading group... In a sharp battle with Mikhalchishin,
where the players castled on opposite sides, Kasparov seized the initiative
and after winning rook for bishop he gained a decisive advantage. The outcome
would hardly have been in doubt - if Mikhalchishin had had more time. But for
his last ten moves he had a little more than a minute left, and Kasparov,
looking out of the corner of his eye at the opponent's quivering flag, and
expecting it to fall at any moment, was simply unable to force himself to
think. And he had heaps of time - a whole hour! But the young player,
repeating the mistake of many, many others, began playing on the opponent's
time-trouble and, of course, he himself made several errors, after which the
advantage passed to Mikhalchishin. Did Kasparov know that in the other
player's time-trouble you shouldn't rush? Of course he knew! But the mistakes
of others do not cost anything; you only pay a real price for your own... ---
'After the round I glanced at Kasparov. To say that the youth was upset would
be putting it mildly. "But what about the promise to Botvinnik - to play 17
good games, not thinking about the result?" I asked. Garik gave a weak smile.
And one can understand him. Because competitive ambition and the fervour of
the struggle - they take their toll (besides, is it really bad to play 17 good
games and finish high up?). I am sure that the wise Botvinnik, whom the youth
phones in Moscow after every round, will guess his state of mind and will not
reproach too severely his temperamental protégé for his hot-headedness. The
mistakes of youth - who has not made them?...'}) (41. -- {Then, on the
adjournment day, I was unable to win against Gulko. However, in the 13th (!)
round I defeated another of the previous year's USSR co-champions - Dorfman.
And in the 14th round I engaged in a tactical battle with Sveshnikov. From the
press: 'The round turned out to be unusual and highly entertaining. It began
with Georgadze setting fire to a cigarette packet in an ash-tray (the reality
of those times! - G.K.). "A fiery round", remarked Razuvaev, who had gone down
into the auditorium (his opponent, Tal, was having a long think), and at this
point the lights went out in the hall. And when they came back on, the
astonished spectators found that the aforementioned Tal and Razuvaev were no
longer on the stage: in the darkness, no longer able to see the position, they
had agreed a draw.' I also offered a draw in the darkness, but Sveshnikov
agreed only when the lights came on... --- On 'plus one', I still cherished
hopes of clinging on to the 'bronze', but in the 15th round I missed a certain
win against Romanishin, and in the 16th, penultimate round, I lost hopelessly
in a Caro-Kann to Tseshkovsky and came down to earth - to 50%. Nevertheless,
after a quick concluding draw with the leader Tal, which suited us both (in
the event of various shared places, I had the better Berger coefficient), I
managed to finish in sole 9th place and retain my 'pass' to the Premier League.
--- That same evening, in one of the quiet rooms behind the stage, I played a
blitz match with Mikhail Tal, who had just won his sixth gold medal as USSR
champion. Our tense encounter ended, to my delight, in a 7-7 draw. On
returning to the hotel, for form's sake, I wrote down all 14 games from memory.
I also recall with what rapt attention the play was followed by two Alexanders
- Bakh and Roshal, people from Karpov's circle. They were probably already in
agreement with Tal, who in an interview gave a very complimentary assessment
of my play: 'Kasparov is undoubtedly a unique phenomenon in chess. I can name
only two players who at the age of fifteen performed so successfully in major
tournaments - Fischer and Spassky. It is clear that whatever place the young
player takes in the next championship, it will no longer be a sensation.'}) (
41. -- {Asriyan: 'Mikhail Botvinnik, whom I interviewed immediately afterwards,
judged Garik's 9th place to be an undoubted success. True, Makogonov, with
whom, on Botvinnik's advice, Kasparov was studying at that time, thought that
the young player could even have finished 5th, but he was suffering from a
cold (he could not restrain himself, and against the advice of his trainers,
he ate some ice-cream). Incidentally, in this championship of the country, for
the first and last time, the paths of two Baku players - Bagirov and Kasparov
- crossed, and Garik, who finished half a point ahead of his compatriot, as
though took from him the baton of the best player in Azerbaijan, which in his
time Bagirov had taken from Makogonov.' --- From the magazine Shakhmaty v SSSR:
'For the first time such a young player - 15-year-old Garry Kasparov - took
part in the USSR Championship Final. His performance was, of course, the chief
sensation. A successful start, wins over highly-experienced grandmasters...
Despite isolated set-backs, explained by inexperience, he played interesting
chess, and boldly accepted a fight, not fearing the exalted titles of his
opponents. With White he fought splendidly - 6 points out of 8. He was less
successful with Black - 2½ out of 9. Kasparov's virtues, as well as his
deficiencies, are clearly apparent. There can be no doubt that with further
serious work he can expect great successes.' --- And the successes were not
long in coming.}) 1-0

[Event "?"]
[Site "?"]
[Date "????.??.??"]
[Round "?"]
[White "'This is the new Fischer!'"]
[Black "?"]
[Result "*"]
[Annotator "Garry Kasparov"]
[PlyCount "1"]
[EventDate "1984.??.??"]
[SourceDate "2012.12.07"]

{International tournament in Banja Luka (10-30 April 1979): 1. Kasparov - 11½ out of 15; 2. Smejkal - 9½; 3-4. Andersson and Petrosian - 9; 5. Adorjan
- 8½; 6. Knezevic - 8; 7-8. Matanovic and Browne - 7½; 9-10. Bukic and
Marjanovic - 7; 11-13. Marovic, Garcia and Vukic - 6½; 14-15. Kurajica and
Hernandez - 6; 16. Sibarevic - 4.} 1. -- {Today it is hard to imagine: despite
my success in the previous championship of the country, in 1979 I had no
expectation of a single 'adult' tournament, apart from the USSR Team
Championship in July and the next Premier League in December. And yet it was
already high time that I became both an international master, and a
grandmaster! It should be remembered, however, that the appearances of Soviet
chess players abroad were strictly rationed, and many languished for long
months or even years in the Sport Committee's queue for international
tournaments. --- 'The 16-year-old Garry would have been stuck with this, had
not Botvinnik again come to the rescue,' Alexander Nikitin recalls. 'On
learning of the strong grandmaster tournament planned for the spring in
Yugoslav Banja Luka, he had intensive discussions with the organisers. And
they, unable to resist the enormous prestige of the ex-world champion, agreed
to the participation of the young Soviet master, who had neither an
international title, nor a rating. Campaigning for his pupil, Botvinnik gave
assurances that the youngster played very well and if anyone would have
regrets about his inclusion in the tournament, it would be his opponents. ---
'The Sports Committee did not take any part in Botvinnik's diplomatic
discussions, but when it saw that, apart from ex-world champion Petrosian, the
organisers had also invited Kasparov to play, it categorically refused to
allow his mother or his trainer to travel with him. This was a blessing in
disguise: the tournament brought together the youngster and the
highly-experienced ex-champion.'} (1. -- {And indeed, in my first 'adult'
international tournament I was fortunate to play under Petrosian's paternal
care. I remember how before this my mother and I went to meet him at his home,
and his wife Rona Yakovlevna said to my mother: 'Don't you worry; in 1953
Tigran also played in the first foreign tournament of the 16-year-old Spassky.
This is a good omen!' The help of 'Iron Tigran' proved invaluable. His humour,
genuine benevolence and wise advice created a good atmosphere, and I quickly
adapted to the unfamiliar situation. In our free time we talked a lot, and not
only about chess topics, we went for walks together, gave simuls', analysed
and discussed games we had played. --- The line-up of the tournament in Banja
Luka was very strong: of the 16 contestants, 14 were grandmasters, a third of
whom were then among the world elite. We were warmly greeted by our hosts.
Yugoslav appeared to be a genuine chess Mecca: where else were so many
international tournaments held and so many international masters and
grandmasters produced! Petrosian always had many fans there, and I too soon
sensed the sympathy of the chess enthusiasts - and I caught fire! Although, of
course, I was anxious, I was hoping for a high place (after all, few of the
opponents were capable of scoring 50% in the USSR Championship Premier League),
and to achieve the grandmaster norm (10½ out of 15), to say nothing of the
international master norm (7½). --- I was a little fortunate with the
pairings: in the first round I made a draw with White against Petrosian, and
the prospect of playing the ex-world champion no longer weighed on my mind. In
the evening I asked Tigran Vartanovich what I should play in the 2nd round
after 1 e4 against Sibarevic - the only Yugoslav master in the tournament.
Perhaps the Caro-Kann? Petrosian replied: 'In the Caro-Kann White has a safe
position, and there is a protracted struggle. Against such an opponent you
should play the Sicilian Defence!' The following day that is what I did - and
I scored a convincing win. Over dinner Petrosian was triumphant: 'Well, what
did I say! The Caro-Kann?! You'd be sitting here now, analysing an adjourned
position...'}) (1. -- {After the 2nd round there was a free day, which
coincided with my birthday. The organisers decided to give me a 16th birthday
present - a respectable suit (which was not surprising, since in Banja Luka I
was strutting around in my Baku clothes), and we set off to the supermarket.
By Soviet standards it was a fairytale spectacle, the choice of goods -
including suits - being incredible. And they said to me: 'Choose whichever one
you want!' I hesitated, and here the genuinely experienced Petrosian took the
initiative. Pushing me away, he carefully examined all the suits, chose one of
the most expensive, in a fine check, and solemly pointed to it: 'This one!'
--- From the following day my motto at the board was 'Full speed ahead!'. In
the 3rd round I was opposed by the 30-year-old Walter Browne, several times
USA champion and a participant in Interzonal tournaments - one of the
noteworthy western players of that time. This was a serious test, although,
with the Premier League already behind me, I did not experience any particular
trepidation.}) *

[Event "32: Banja Luka"]
[Site "?"]
[Date "1979.04.14"]
[Round "3"]
[White "Kasparov, G."]
[Black "Browne, W."]
[Result "1-0"]
[ECO "E12"]
[Annotator "Garry Kasparov"]
[PlyCount "77"]
[EventDate "1979.??.??"]
[Source "Everyman Chess"]
[SourceDate "2012.11.28"]

1. d4 Nf6 2. c4 e6 3. Nf3 b6 4. a3 {(4) My first experience of employing the
Petrosian Variation, which later became a favourite of mine and brought me
numerous memorable wins. At that time I did not yet have any deep knowledge
here and I was only just starting to develop my grandmaster opening repertoire.
} c5 ({This continuation leads to a more complicated game than the traditional
} 4... Bb7 5. Nc3 d5 (5... Ne4 {- Game No.61}) 6. cxd5 Nxd5 7. e3 {(Game Nos.
43, 52, 85)} ({or} 7. Qc2 {(Game Nos. 73, 75, 98). Perhaps Browne was hoping
to exploit my youthful impulsiveness and inexperience? I stopped to think.}))
5. d5 {(14)} Ba6 6. Qc2 exd5 ({Timman's move} 6... Qe7 {, which was
fashionable at that time, proved to be dubious because of the reply which I
found together with Magerramov:} 7. Bg5 exd5 8. Nc3 $1 Bxc4 9. e4 $1 {
(Kasparov-van der Wiel, Graz 1981).}) 7. cxd5 d6 (7... g6 {- Game No.68.}) 8.
Nc3 Nbd7 $6 ({It is hard to say why my opponent did not play} 8... g6 {and ...Bg7, with normal play in the spirit of the Modern Benoni. 'It is from such
imperceptible errors that an advantage for one of the sides is often
generated' (Nikitin).}) 9. Bf4 $1 {(8) Now, because of the weakness of the
d6-pawn, Black is forced to develop his bishop more modestly - at e7, and he
has a rather passive position.} Be7 10. g3 {(7) Whereas White develops his
king's bishop at g2.} O-O 11. Bg2 Re8 12. O-O Nh5 ({If} 12... b5 {I was
planning} 13. b4 $1 {.}) 13. Bd2 {(6)} Nhf6 {Browne was evidently checking
whether there would again follow 14 Bf4. But, of course, I had no intention of
repeating moves.} 14. Rfe1 {(5) Beginning preparations for the typical pawn
breakthrough e2-e4-e5.} ({The prophylactic} 14. a4 {would have allowed the
opponent to make successful use of the transit point e5 after} Bb7 15. e4 Ng4 {
.}) 14... Bf8 $6 {Again slightly passively played.} ({Now if} 14... Bb7 15. e4
Ng4 {White had the reply} 16. h3 Nge5 17. Nxe5 Nxe5 18. f4 Nc4 19. e5 {with
the initiative.}) ({But perhaps Black should have initiated counterplay on the
queenside -} 14... b5 $5 {, although here too after} 15. b4 $1 {White's
chances are better:} Rc8 16. bxc5 (16. Bh3 $5) 16... Rxc5 17. Qb3 {etc.}) 15.
a4 {(4) Playing for a bind and to restrict the opponent's possibilities.
White is threatening also to play h2-h3, and so Browne tries to improve the
placing of his minor pieces, before he becomes too cramped.} Ng4 16. Nb5 {(9)}
Bb7 ({White's offensive develops smoothly after} 16... Nge5 17. Nxe5 Nxe5 18.
f4 {and e2-e4.}) 17. e4 {(4)} a6 18. Na3 $1 {With the intention of creating a
striking force with Nc4 and Bc3, exploiting the fact that the black bishop is
not on the long diagonal. White's advantage is becoming increasingly obvious
- in the words of Nikitin, 'he has succeeded in consistently accumulating
small positional pluses'.} Rb8 ({If} 18... g6 {, then again} 19. h3 {, for
example:} Nge5 ({or} 19... Ngf6 20. Rad1 Qc7 21. Nc4) 20. Nxe5 Nxe5 21. f4 {.})
19. h3 {(10)} Ngf6 ({After} 19... Nge5 {in 'Informator' I gave} 20. Nh2 {with
the idea of f2-f4.} (20. Nh4 {is also good.}) ({. But perhaps} 20. Nxe5 $5 {is
simpler - if} Nxe5 ({while after} 20... dxe5 {(seemingly the lesser evil)} 21.
Nc4 Qc7 {all the same White dominates in the centre and Black's position is
unpleasant}) 21. f4 Nd7 22. Bc3 {the threat of e4-e5 is very strong.})) 20. Bc3
{(9) Continuing to prepare e4-e5.} (20. Nc4 b5 21. Na5 Qb6 {was not so clear,
whereas now Black is deprived of counterplay.}) 20... Qc7 21. Nd2 (21. Bf1 $5 {
.}) 21... Bc8 22. Bf1 $1 {An accurate prophylactic move, again not allowing ...b6-b5. Black is almost paralysed.} g5 $2 {Browne's reaction staggered me: is
such a weakening really possible?! 'However, Modern Benoni devotees often do
this, and they are rarely punished for a positional sin of this kind.' 
(Nikitin)} ({I was expecting the natural move} 22... g6 {and I would probably
have replied} 23. f4 {(intending e4-e5)} Nh5 24. Kh2 Ndf6 ({or} 24... Bg7 25.
Nac4) 25. Qd3 {with an obvious advantage.}) ({The problem of the f8-bishop has
to be solved -} 22... Ne5 $6 23. f4 Ned7 24. Qd3 {merely plays into White's
hands.}) 23. Nf3 $1 {(5) White, exploiting his opponent's 'hole-creating'
play, promptly changes tack and begins a swift attack.} h6 ({Also after} 23...
g4 24. Nh4 h5 $6 ({or} 24... Ne5 25. hxg4 Nfxg4 26. f3 Nf6 27. Nc4) 25. Qd2 Ne5
26. f4 gxf3 27. Nc4 {Black's position is unenviable.}) 24. Nc4 {The most
aggressive;} ({although nothing would have been spoiled by some useful waiting
move - say,} 24. b3) ({or} 24. Bd3 {.}) 24... b5 25. axb5 axb5 26. e5 $1 ({Of
course, White also has an excellent position in the event of} 26. Ba5 Qb7 27.
Na3 c4 28. Nd4 Ne5 29. b3) ({or} 26. Na5 $5 b4 27. Bxf6 Nxf6 28. Nc6 {, but
the strike in the centre is far more flamboyant and vigorous. Intuition and
specific calculation suggested to me that Black's counterplay was too late.})
26... Nxd5 {A difficult choice.} ({Black would have lost the exchange without
sufficient compensation after} 26... dxe5 27. Ncxe5 Nxe5 (27... Nxd5 $2 28.
Nxf7 $1) (27... Rb6 28. Ba5) 28. Bxe5 Rxe5 29. Nxe5 (29. Rxe5 $5) 29... Nxd5
30. Rad1 {etc.}) (26... bxc4 27. exf6 Rxe1 28. Rxe1 {was also unsatisfactory
for Black - in 'Informator' I assessed this position as winning for White, and
this is correct:} -- ({, if} 28... Nb6 {he decides matters with the thunderous}
29. Nxg5 $3 hxg5 30. Qd2 Bf5 31. Qxg5+ Bg6 32. Bg2) ({, while after} 28... Qd8
{(attacking the f6-pawn) there is the no less deafening stroke} 29. Re6 $3 {
(threatening Qf5 and Nxg5)} Rb3 {(with the idea of ...Rxc3)} 30. Nxg5 $1 hxg5
31. Qf5 Bh6 32. Qe4 $1 Ne5 (32... Bf8 33. Qe3 $1) ({or} 32... Nf8 33. Re8 Qd7
34. Bxc4 {does not help}) 33. Bxe5 dxe5 34. Bxc4 Rb4 35. Re7 Ba6 36. Qxe5 Bxc4
37. Re8+ Qxe8 38. Qxe8+ Bf8 39. d6 {with a pretty win.})) 27. Nxd6 {(4)} Bxd6 {
(after other replies too Black has a very difficult position)} 28. exd6 Qd8 29.
Ne5 {(6) A logical move: White needs to exchange pieces, to clear the way for
the d-pawn.} ({However, there was also a combinative solution -} 29. Rxe8+ {
(or first 29 Nxg5!)} Qxe8 30. Re1 Qf8 31. Nxg5 $1 hxg5 ({or} 31... N7f6 32. Re5
$1 b4 (32... Nxc3 33. Qxc3 {and wins}) 33. Bd2 Qxd6 34. Nf3 {, and Black has
no defence}) 32. Qf5 Nxc3 33. Qxg5+ Kh8 34. bxc3 Qxd6 35. Bd3 $1 {.}) 29... Nb4
({There is nothing else:} 29... Nxc3 $2 30. Nc6 $1 {.}) 30. Qd2 (30. Qc1 $1 {
was rather more forceful, keeping the c5-pawn under fire.}) 30... Nxe5 31. Rxe5
Rxe5 32. Bxe5 Nc6 33. Qe3 {Probably the simplest: the power of the passed
d6-pawn is irresistible.} Nxe5 ({Of course, not} 33... f6 $2 34. Bxf6 $1 Qxf6
35. Qe8+ {and Qxc6.}) 34. Qxe5 c4 35. Bg2 Be6 ({If} 35... Bb7 {White would
have won by} 36. d7 $1 Bxg2 37. Kxg2 {.}) 36. Ra7 {(5)} b4 $6 {The final error,
now in severe time-trouble.} (36... Qf8 {was more resilient, although after}
37. Bd5 (37. d7 Rd8 38. Bc6 b4 {is not so clear}) {, all the same Black has a
lost position:} 37... Bxd5 (37... Re8 38. Rc7 $1) 38. Qxd5 Rd8 39. d7 Kg7 40.
Qe5+ f6 41. Qxb5 {etc.}) 37. Be4 $1 {An elegant stroke: Bh7+ is threatened.} c3
({Alas,} 37... Qb6 38. Re7 {is bad for Black.}) 38. Bh7+ $1 Kxh7 39. Qxe6 {. 
Times: 2.08-2.29. --- Although Browne's play in this important game was far
from perfect, the rout I inflicted on him impressed both the spectators, and
the contestants. By scoring 2½ out of 3 I took the lead, and I sensed that
they had begun to respect me.} 1-0

[Event "33: Banja Luka"]
[Site "?"]
[Date "1979.04.16"]
[Round "5"]
[White "Kasparov, G."]
[Black "Marovic, D."]
[Result "1-0"]
[ECO "D61"]
[Annotator "Garry Kasparov"]
[PlyCount "69"]
[EventDate "1979.??.??"]
[Source "Everyman Chess"]
[SourceDate "2012.11.28"]

{The following day I easily defeated the Cuban Roman Hernandez with Black - in
a King's Indian Defence, although events developed more in the spirit of the
Benko Gambit. And in the 5th game came a meeting with one of the home players
- the experienced Drazen Marovic, the editor of the Yugoslav magazine
'Sahovski glasnik'.} 1. c4 ({In Banja Luka my steady drift from} 1. e4 {to the
closed games continued. I don't remember why I played this rather than 1 d4 
(evidently to avoid something), but the result was a classical Queen's Gambit.}
) 1... e6 2. Nf3 d5 3. d4 Nf6 4. Nc3 Be7 5. Bg5 O-O 6. e3 Nbd7 (6... h6 {-
Game Nos. 20, 41, 54, 92.}) 7. Qc2 {Intending queenside castling and a direct
attack on the king - this plan always attracted me, and I analysed such
positions a great deal.} c5 ({In the game Kasparov-Portisch (Brussels 1986)
Black played} 7... h6 {, expecting the usual} 8. Bh4 ({, or} 8. h4 c5 9. O-O-O
{(Portisch-Barcza, Budapest 1961)}) ({, but even in the Queen's Gambit I used
to seek romanticism, and therefore I replied} 8. cxd5 $5 {. The sudden piece
sacrifice threw the venerable grandmaster into an almost irrational panic, and
he preferred to go into an inferior, but typical position -} exd5 (8... hxg5 $5
{is more critical - after} 9. dxe6 fxe6 10. Nxg5 Nb6 11. h4 $1 {and h4-h5
White has two pawns for the bishop and chances of an attack, but it is unclear
how serious they are}) 9. Bf4 $1 c5 10. Be2 b6 11. O-O Bb7 12. Rfd1 Rc8 {(but
already on the 14th move he made a serious mistake and lost).})) 8. O-O-O ({
The simplifying} 8. cxd5 Nxd5 9. Bxe7 Qxe7 10. Nxd5 exd5 11. Bd3 h6 ({or} 11...
g6 {(Alekhine-Capablanca, 10th match game, Buenos Aires 1927) was not at all
to my taste. But, by contrast, the variations with 8 0-0-0 fascinated me (and
if something is interesting, let's play it!), although now I take a rather
ironic view of my attacking bursts...})) 8... Qa5 {The main reply.} 9. Kb1 {
This move of Keres and the associated scheme of development was what I was
counting on.} ({In the old game Rotlewi-Teichmann (Karlsbad 1911) after} 9.
cxd5 exd5 10. dxc5 Nxc5 $6 (10... h6 $1 11. h4 ({or} 11. Bh4) 11... Qxc5 {is
more solid}) 11. Nd4 $6 ({but in the event of} 11. Nxd5 $1 Nxd5 12. Rxd5 f6 $1
13. Bc4 $1 Kh8 14. Bf4 {(h4)} Bd7 {he would have had to show that he had
sufficient compensation for the pawn}) 11... Be6 12. Kb1 Rac8 {Black gained
excellent play.}) 9... h6 ({I think that there is also nothing terrible for
Black after} 9... dxc4 10. Bxc4 cxd4 11. exd4 Nb6 12. Bb3 Bd7 {(Keres-Fichtl,
Prague 1943). Of course, I had not prepared killer variations for all
eventualities, but I had a strong desire to create a war-like atmosphere on
the board.}) ({Or} 9... cxd4 10. exd4 dxc4 {.}) 10. h4 {(6) A standard method
of attack. Possibly, so as not to provoke its development, Black should have
managed without the moves ...h7-h6 and h2-h4.} dxc4 ({Up to here Marovic had
followed the Yugoslav 'Encyclopaedia of Chess Openings' of that time, which
recommended} 10... cxd4 11. exd4 -- (11... hxg5 {(?)} 12. hxg5 Ne4 13. Nxe4
dxe4 {(14 Qxe4 Qf5). But at home I had found the deadly move} 14. c5 $1 -- ({
, for example:} 14... f5 15. gxf6 $1 Rxf6 (15... Nxf6 16. Ne5) 16. Qxe4 Nf8 17.
Bd3) ({, or} 14... Nxc5 15. dxc5 Rd8 (15... Qxc5 16. Qxe4 Qf5 17. Qxf5 exf5 18.
Rd4 $1) 16. Rxd8+ Qxd8 17. Bc4 Bxg5 18. Qxe4 Bf6 19. Ne5 {with a fearfully
strong attack.})) ({. Alas, this preparation never in fact saw the light of
day. However, instead of 11...hxg5? Black has the forceful reply} 11... Bb4 $1
{and then} 12. Bd2 dxc4 13. Bxc4 Nb6 14. Bb3 Bd7 15. Ne5 Bc6 16. f3 Bd5 17. g4
Bxb3 18. Qxb3 {(Piket-Condie, Kiljava 1984)} Rfd8 {with a normal game.})) 11.
Bxc4 {(10)} Nb6 ({For a long time I considered this 'sideways' move to be
dubious and I gave preference to another defence:} 11... cxd4 12. exd4 Nb6 13.
Bb3 Bd7 14. Ne5 (14. d5 $5 Rfc8 $1) 14... Rac8 15. Rh3 {(a variation from
'Informator')} Bc6 $1) ({or} 11... Rd8 $5 12. dxc5 (12. g4 $6 b5 $1 13. Bxb5
Bb7) 12... Nxc5 13. Rxd8+ Bxd8 14. Bf4 Bd7 {with equality. However, as we will
see, the text is not yet a mistake.}) 12. Bxf6 (12. Bd3 Bd7 $1 {.}) 12... gxf6
$6 {Afraid of losing a pawn, Marovic breaks up his king's fortress.} ({It
would have been much safer to play} 12... Bxf6 $1 13. Ne4 $1 -- ({, and now not
} 13... Be7 $2 14. dxc5 {(Cvitan-Toth, Lugano 1984), since} Bxc5 {is bad
because of} 15. Nfg5 $1 g6 16. Bb3 {, winning}) ({, but the cool-headed} 13...
Nxc4 $1 14. Nxf6+ gxf6 15. Qxc4 cxd4 16. Nxd4 ({if} 16. exd4) ({or} 16. Rxd4 {
there also follows} e5 $1) 16... e5 17. Nb3 Qb6 18. Nc5 Rd8 {, and it is hard
for White to exploit the weakness of the enemy king.}) ({. And even after the
less suitable move order, given by me in 'Informator' -} 13... cxd4 14. Nxf6+
gxf6 {, allowing} 15. Rxd4 Nxc4 16. Rg4+ $1 Kh8 17. Rxc4 e5 18. Ng5 $6 fxg5 19.
hxg5 {, Black has the defence} Kg7 $1 ({instead of the losing} 19... e4 $2 20.
Rc5 Qb4 21. a3 $1) 20. Rc5 Qa6 21. gxh6+ Kh8 {.})) 13. Be2 {(6)} cxd4 14. exd4
$6 {(5) An important moment. At the board the capture with the pawn seemed to
me to be the most logical: it is seemingly easier for the queen to attack the
black king (Qd2 with the threat of Qxh6).} ({But in fact} 14. Nxd4 $1 Bd7 15.
Qe4 {was stronger, with play on both wings:} Rab8 ({while in the event of} 
15... Rfc8 {both the 'greedy'} 16. Qxb7 ({and the 'creative'} 16. Rh3 $5) 16...
Rab8 17. Qa6 {are in White's favour}) 16. Bd3 f5 17. Qf4 {, and Black is in
trouble (} Kh7 18. Nb3 Qb4 19. Bxf5+ $1 exf5 20. Rd4 {and wins).}) 14... Bd7
15. Rh3 {(the point of White's plan)} Na4 (15... Rfc8 {is risky:} 16. Qd2 $1 ({
if} 16. Rg3+ {, then not} Kf8 $2 ({but} 16... Kh8 $1 17. Qd2 Bf8 {with unclear
play}) 17. Ne5 $1 fxe5 18. Qh7 $1 Ke8 19. Rg8+ Bf8 20. Bh5 {and wins}) 16...
Bf8 17. Ne4 Qxd2 (17... Qf5 $2 18. Bd3) 18. Nxf6+ Kg7 19. Nh5+ Kh8 20. Rxd2 {
and Black is a pawn down, although he has some compensation for it.}) 16. Rg3+
{(34)} Kh8 17. Qd2 ({Realising that} 17. Nxa4 Bxa4 18. Qc1 Kh7 19. b3 Bb5 {was
unpromising, I decided to allow a weakening of the pawns defending my king.})
17... Nxc3+ 18. bxc3 Kh7 {The correct move.} ({In the event of} 18... Qf5+ $2
19. Bd3 Qh5 {there is the sudden and very powerful stroke} 20. Rg6 $3 fxg6 21.
g4 Qxg4 22. Qxh6+ {. I saw this at the board, although later in 'Informator' I
assessed the position after} Kg8 23. Rg1 Qxg1+ 24. Nxg1 Rf7 {as unclear. In
fact} 25. Bxg6 Rg7 26. Ne2 $1 {gives White good winning chances:} Bf8 ({or} 
26... Be8 27. Bxe8 Rxe8 28. Nf4 {etc.}) 27. Ng3 {.}) 19. Bd3+ {(16) Here I
could not altogether imagine what to do next.} ({After} 19. d5 {the simple} f5
({or} 19... Rg8 {is possible, and the frontal attack does not succeed.})) 19...
f5 20. Ne5 Bb5 $1 {(the only move)} 21. Rf3 $6 {(4) This move, to which I
previously attached an exclamation mark, has only one advantage - a
psychological one: it creates a new threat (g2-g4), which scares the opponent!}
({It is clear that if} 21. Bc2 {Marovic would have replied} Ba4 $1 {,
insisting on the exchange of bishops.}) ({Therefore the best chance was} 21.
Re3 $1 {(defending the e5-knight and intensifying the threat of g2-g4)} Bxd3+
22. Qxd3 Kh8 $6 ({or} 22... Kg7 23. g4 $1 {, nevertheless retaining the
initiative}) 23. Qe2 {.}) 21... f6 $2 {A serious positional mistake - an
irreparable weakening of the e6-pawn, and with it a whole complex of light
squares.} ({It was essential to play} 21... Bf6 {(d6)} 22. g4 (22. Nc4 Bxc4 $1)
22... Bxe5 23. gxf5 Bxd3+ 24. Qxd3 Bd6 $1 {, parrying the attack} ({but not} 
24... Rad8 $2 {which I gave in 'Informator', because of} 25. fxe6+ Kh8 26. e7 {
and wins})) ({or} 21... Bxd3+ 22. Qxd3 Bd6 $1 {with the same threat of ...Bxe5;
} ({bad is} 22... h5 $2 23. g4 $1 hxg4 24. Rxf5 $1) ({or} 22... f6 $2 23. Rxf5
$1 {- it was these tactical strokes that I was hoping for}) 23. Nc4 Qb5+ 24.
Ka1 Be7 {, maintaining the dynamic balance (for example,} 25. Rb1 Qa6 26. g4
Rac8 27. Ne5 Qxd3 28. Rxd3 Rc7 29. gxf5 Bxh4 {etc.). --- Well, the nature of
this mistake is perfectly explicable: the grandmaster, accustomed to the quiet
treatment of the Queen's Gambit with kingside castling, was suddenly forced to
play a sharp position rather like a Sicilian - and he cracked under the
pressure.}) 22. Nc4 Qc7 ({The situation has changed sharply: now after the
exchange} 22... Bxc4 $2 23. Bxc4 {the white bishop is rampant.}) (22... Qa4 23.
Qe2 {was only a small improvement for Black.}) 23. Qe2 {(3)} Bxc4 ({And this
is desperation: if} 23... Qd7 {there is the decisive} 24. d5 $1 {.}) 24. Bxc4
e5 25. Rxf5 {Black has been left empty-handed - he is a pawn down and without
any counterplay.} Ba3 26. Qe4 {(6)} (26. dxe5 $1 fxe5 27. Qg4 {would have won
more quickly.}) 26... Kh8 27. Rh5 Qh7 28. Qxh7+ (28. Bd3 Qxe4 29. Bxe4 {, etc.
was also good.}) 28... Kxh7 29. dxe5 Kg6 (29... Rac8 30. Rd4 {.}) 30. g4 fxe5
31. Rd7 $2 {A vexing lapse! In my opponent's severe time-trouble I relaxed,
having about 15 minutes in reserve and thinking I could win 'as I pleased'.} ({
The simple} 31. Rxe5 {would indeed have concluded things quickly, since} Rxf2
$2 {is not possible because of} 32. Rd7 $1 {.}) 31... Rae8 $1 {Unexpectedly
the situation has again become sharper. Here I became nervous and I hurriedly
captured a pawn.} 32. Rxb7 $6 {(10)} ({I should have taken myself in hand and
found} 32. Bd5 $1 {with the threat of Be4+, which would still have maintained
real winning chances:} e4 $6 ({or} 32... Re7 33. Be4+ Kg7 34. Rd2 {followed by
g4-g5}) 33. Rxb7 Rxf2 34. Bc6 $1 Re7 (34... Re6 35. Rf5 $1) 35. Rxe7 Bxe7 36.
Bxe4+ Kg7 37. g5 {.}) 32... Rxf2 33. Rxa7 {I hurriedly grabbed another pawn.} (
{Now after} 33. Bd5 Re7 {White would have had little chance of success.}) 33...
Bf8 $2 ({With his flag hanging, Marovic missed the saving intermediate move} 
33... Rd8 $1 {- after the forced} 34. Bf7+ $1 Rxf7 35. Rxa3 {the win for White
would have been highly problematic:} Rf1+ 36. Kc2 Rf2+ 37. Kb3 Rb8+ 38. Kc4
Rf4+ 39. Kc5 Rxg4 40. Rxe5 Rxh4 41. Ra6+ Kf7 {etc.}) 34. Ra6+ Kh7 35. Rf5 {.
And in this again hopeless position Black lost on time. --- Times: 2.17-2.30.
--- A fourth successive win! An uneven game, and by the highest standards by
no means a masterpiece. Nevertheless it also made a big impression - by its
daring: it was a long time since 0-0-0 had been played against this line of
the Queen's Gambit. The enormous intensity of the play excited the spectators
- the audience was buzzing, and as soon as I had won, some man in the middle
row wearing a military uniform leaped up from his seat and exclaimed: 'This is
the new Fischer!'. Later it transpired that this was the famous Yugoslav
journalist Dmitri Bjelica (at that time he was involved in military training).
--- From my telephone interview with a '64' correspondent: 'The tournament in
Banja Luka has begun rather unexpectedly for me. Of course, I was hoping to
perform successfully, but I thought that the fight for the lead would be
sharper'. After a difficult draw in the 6th round with Jan Smejkal, one of the
heroes of the 1973 Leningrad Interzonal Tournament, I happily disposed of a
quartet of Yugoslav grandmasters - Marjanovic, Knezevic (although I had a
rather dubious position), Bukic and Vukic! 9 out of 10!!} (35. -- {The most
crucial encounter was the one with Milan Vukic. Before the start of the
tournament, like the opponents of the young Capablanca in San Sebastian 1911,
he had been openly complaining that the organisers had invited a player whom
no one knew. 'Kasparov doesn't even have an international rating!' he
complained. 'The Russians are sending us children. They are insulting us.'
However, the spectators apparently thought differently and they were on my
side. They gave me especially strong support during my game with Vukic. The
grandmaster took offence at the audience and even began arguing with them, but
someone shouted to him: 'You should be playing chess, not disputing rights'.
My win created a storm of delight in the auditorium. Never before had I
enjoyed such enthusiastic support! --- Incidentally, not only Vukic, but also
some of his colleagues were afraid of losing rating points playing against an
opponent who did not yet have a rating, and they expressed their
dissatisfaction with my participation in the tournament. However, as in Minsk
1978, as soon as I began gathering points all these conversations died down.
--- Strictly speaking, I had earned an international rating of 2545 back in
the 1978 USSR Championship Premier League. However, although by FIDE rules a
rating should be assigned to a player on the result of his first rated
tournament, no one was in a hurry to give me an Elo rating. The Moscow chess
officials cynically stated: 'There's plenty of time for that'. But if I had
been assigned a rating starting from scratch on my result in Banja Luka, it
would have been 2695, while after ten rounds it even reached 2800, higher than
Fischer's record! I remember how at the time Andras Adorjan said with a laugh:
'Don't worry: now they will quickly assign you your Soviet rating'. And that
is what happened: towards the end of the tournament suddenly I at last
received my lawful 2545, and then an additional 30 points for Banja Luka.}) (
35. -- {A few years later, with 9 points out of 10, I would have fought for a
super-result. But then, after making quick draws with Andersson, Matanovic and
Guillermo Garcia, two rounds before the finish I had already guaranteed myself
sole first place in the tournament and had achieved not only the international
master norm, but also my first grandmaster norm! My fighting spirit evaporated.
The concluding games, with Kurajica and Adorjan, also took place 'in a spirit
of peace and mutual understanding', and all the same the margin over my
nearest rivals remained two points. I was happy with my performance, although
later I slightly regretted that I had not tried to squeeze the maximum... ---
From a telephone interview with Petrosian: 'Garik is undoubtedly a great
talent. His dynamic, interesting play was a particular feature of the
tournament. Many chess fans came specially to the Large Hall of the House of
Culture to see Kasparov. In Yugoslav newspapers he is constantly compared with
Robert Fischer.' --- Bozidar Djurasevic: 'The results of the tournament in
Banja Luka were sensational: by a wide margin, victory was gained by a
16-year-old schoolboy from Baku, Garik Kasparov. Our experts assess
exceptionally highly the creative and competitive potential of this talented
master. Kasparov certainly has a great future. There can be no doubt that very
soon Garik will be joining the fight for the world chess crown'. --- Robert
Wade: 'Kasparov's remarkable performance here should forever enshrine the
tournament among the epics of chess. Is there such a precedent in chess
history? Robert J. Fischer at Zurich 1959 (3rd to Tal)? Boris Spassky at
Bucharest 1953? Both were 16.'}) (35. -- {When I returned to Baku, another
event occurred that was important for my career: on 14th May 1979 my mother
and I were invited to meet the leader of Azerbaijan, Geidar Aliev. One of the
participants at this meeting, the journalist Valery Asriyan, recalls: 'This
was some news - Aliev invites Kasparov! A genuine sensation. True, after his
victory in Banja Luka Garik was a hero... Nevertheless, the very fact that the
First Secretary of the Azerbaijan Communist Party Central Committee and
Candidate Member of the Politburo meets a ninth-year schoolboy could not help
be a surprise. This had never happened before!' --- Nikitin: 'From this moment
the Azerbaijan sports authorities began providing all the assistance needed
for the further improvement of the swiftly-rising chess star. Kasparov
resorted to Aliev's assistance only in extreme cases, when nothing else could
restore deliberately flouted justice. I have no doubt that without the support
of this outstanding leader, Garry would never have got through to the match
with Karpov in 1984.' --- I had only a short rest after successfully
completing the ninth class at school. While still in a state of victorious
euphoria, I did not play my best for Azerbaijan in the USSR Team Championship 
(Moscow, July 1979) - in the semi-final, although I again defeated
Polugayevsky, I scored just 2 out of 4, and our team only qualified for the C Final. There I scored 3½ out of 4, but this was faint consolation - not the
same standard of opponent... The lesson received forced me again to get down
to serious work on chess. I had to prepare for the Premier League.}) 1-0

[Event "?"]
[Site "?"]
[Date "????.??.??"]
[Round "?"]
[White "First 'Bronze'"]
[Black "?"]
[Result "*"]
[Annotator "Garry Kasparov"]
[PlyCount "1"]
[EventDate "1984.??.??"]
[SourceDate "2012.12.07"]

{47th USSR Championship Premier League (Minsk, 29th November - 27th December
1979): 1. Geller - 11½ out of 17; 2. Yusupov - 10½; 3-4. Kasparov and
Balashov - 10; 5-7. Makarychev, Georgadze and Kupreichik - 9½; 8. Vaganian
- 9; 9. Lerner - 8½; 10-13. Rashkovsky, Beliavsky, Razuvaev and Romanishin
- 8; 14-15. Tal and Dolmatov - 7½; 16. Sveshnikov - 7; 17-18. Anikaev and
Tseshkovsky - 5½.} 1. -- {In the autumn of 1979, before the championship of
the country, I played three games in Baku in a local team tournament and, by
tradition, a training match with Magerramov. The preparation was serious. Two
months before the championship Botvinnik wrote to me: 'What concerns me most
of all is your play with Black. After your success in Banja Luka they will be
pulling out all the stops against you, especially with White. Therefore with
Black you should play solid variations, without any risk. However, passive
play is not for you - the variations must without fail have opportunities for
counterplay'. --- Nikitin: 'The three-month work plan which I compiled
included chess, physical and psychological preparation, including
auto-training. A major repair of variations already tested plus excellent
competitive form enabled Garry to conduct the first half of games more
intensively than earlier, without fearing tiredness in the fifth hour of play.
And, as a result, we had no particular opening problems.'} (1. -- {After the
Sokolsky Memorial I considered Minsk to be a lucky city for me and I again
travelled there with great hopes, intending not only to consolidate my place
in the Premier League, but also to endeavour to improve on my previous year's
result. Incidentally, this Premier League promised to be especially
interesting: the participation of the world champion was expected. But
literally just before the drawing of lots, Karpov pulled out, referring to the
recent birth of his son... And so a reserve participant was allowed into the
tournament - 19-year-old Artur Yusupov, who fully justified the saying about a
player included at the last moment doing well: he won the silver medal and the
title of grandmaster! --- Initially I played very cautiously - so much so,
that the chief arbiter Salo Flohr, an old friend and rival of Botvinnik from
back in the 1930s, was surprised by my unusual restraint. 'No sacrifices -
more in the style of Karpov or Petrosian,' he said about my first round win
over Tamaz Georgadze, one of the heroes of the previous championship, who on
his home ground in Tbilisi had not suffered a single loss. But other experts
thought that 'this game is of undoubted interest, revealing features of the
chess character of the young player from Baku.'}) *

[Event "34: 47th USSR Championship, Minsk"]
[Site "?"]
[Date "1979.11.30"]
[Round "1"]
[White "Kasparov, G."]
[Black "Georgadze, T."]
[Result "1-0"]
[ECO "C24"]
[Annotator "Garry Kasparov"]
[PlyCount "79"]
[EventDate "1979.??.??"]
[Source "Everyman Chess"]
[SourceDate "2012.11.28"]

1. e4 ({A year earlier I opened} 1. d4 {, but did not achieve anything in a
Queen's Gambit - the game ended in a quick draw, and so this time I decided to
try 'serving from the right'.}) 1... e5 2. Nf3 d6 {The Tbilisi grandmaster's
first two moves came as a surprise to me. Before this Georgadze was faithful
to 1...c5, and, in particular, he used to employ (like, incidentally, my 3rd
round opponent - Yusupov) the Chelyabinsk Variation, for which my trainer and
I had prepared. And suddenly the Philidor Defence!} 3. Bc4 {(8) After some
thought I made a psychologically strong move - I avoided the main line, with
which my opponent was more familiar.} ({If} 3. d4 {there could have followed}
exd4 4. Nxd4 Nf6 5. Nc3 Be7 6. g3 (6. Be2 O-O 7. O-O a6 {(Tseshkovsky-Georgadze
Tseshkovsky-Georgadze, 7th round)}) ({or} 6. Bf4 O-O 7. Qd2 d5 $5 {with very
sharp play, demanding extensive preparation}) 6... d5 {(Geller-Georgadze, 3rd
round).}) 3... Be7 4. d3 ({Finally avoiding} 4. d4 exd4 5. Nxd4 Nf6 6. Nc3 O-O
{(Oll-Georgadze, Malaga 1991). White answers a surprise with cunning, by
choosing a rare development set-up, after which for a long time Black has to
manoeuvre without any concrete aim, in a situation unfamiliar for a Sicilian
player, which should cause him definite discomfort. As in fact happened!}) 4...
Nf6 5. c3 O-O 6. O-O c6 ({A more flexible set-up than} 6... Nc6 {, transposing
into a 'pianissimo' Two Knights.}) 7. Bb3 {(6)} Be6 8. Bc2 {(8) This bishop
retreat apparently distressed Georgadze (here I recall that in the ancient
'Kurs debyutov' against 3 Bc4 Vasily Panov recommended the immediate 3...Be6),
although it is a logical consequence of White's opening strategy: he is
playing the Ruy Lopez. But what is Black playing?} h6 {Naturally, Black
strives to preserve his bishop from exchange by the knight.} ({In the event of
} 8... Nbd7 9. Re1 (9. Ng5 Bg4) 9... Qc7 10. d4 Rfe8 11. h3 {all the same
there does not appear to be a more suitable move than} h6 {.}) 9. Re1 {(3)}
Nbd7 10. Nbd2 {(10)} Qc7 11. d4 {Of course, the ...d6-d5 advance should not be
allowed. By being the first to advance his d-pawn, White retains a slight
initiative.} Rfe8 ({Black could have played} 11... Bg4 {(after which there
would have followed} 12. h3 Bh5 13. Nf1 {), but he chooses a restrained
continuation, which for the moment does not oblige him to disclose his plans.})
12. h3 {(11)} Nf8 {A typical knight manoeuvre to g6.} ({After} 12... Rad8 {,
completing Black's development, I would also have replied} 13. c4 {.}) 13. c4
$5 {(6) After first denying Black the g4-square, White unexpectedly changes
the general pattern of the position and seizes space in the centre.} ({The
quiet} 13. Nf1 Ng6 14. Ng3 Rad8 15. Bd2 {also promised him slightly the better
chances.}) 13... Ng6 ({Black allows the further advance of the d-pawn,
possibly fearing} 13... exd4 14. Nxd4 Qb6 $1 15. N2f3 $5 ({White has to
sacrifice a pawn: after} 15. Nxe6 Nxe6 16. Nf3 Nd7 {he cannot expect anything})
15... Bxc4 16. Nf5 Rad8 17. b3 Be6 18. Nxe7+ Rxe7 19. Bb2 {with fair
compensation for the minimal material deficit.}) 14. d5 Bd7 15. Nb1 $1 {(7)} ({
The routine} 15. Nf1 {would have weakened White's fighting potential on the
queenside -} cxd5 16. cxd5 Rac8 {etc. But now he is planning an offensive with
Nc3, Bd2, b2-b4 and so on. --- Incidentally, among my memorable games this is
the third where the return of the queen's knight to b1 occurred (cf. Game Nos.
18 and 24).}) 15... Bf8 $6 {Black does not sense the danger.} ({In the quest
for counter-chances he should have opened the c-file -} 15... cxd5 16. cxd5 {
and after} b5 {begun 'Spanish' counterplay on the queenside, with, for example,
the following piece arrangement in mind: ...Rec8, ...Qb7, ...Be7-d8-b6(a5) and
in some cases ...Nh5.}) 16. Nc3 c5 $2 {And this is already a serious
positional mistake (Tarrasch would have written 'decisive'), the direct
consequence of Black's discomfort and psychological problems. Georgadze was
aiming to avoid the 'dangerous' opening of the position, and to play as
solidly as possible, but here 'solidly' signifies passively. Even with a loss
of time, he should have reverted to the plan with ...cxd5.} 17. Ba4 $1 {(4) 
With this central pawn structure it has become advantageous for White to
exchange the light-square bishops, especially since the prospects for the
remaining dark-square bishops are so different.} a6 18. Bxd7 Nxd7 $6 {A loss
of time.} (18... Qxd7 {was more logical, after which I liked} 19. a3 ({after
the constricting} 19. a4 {White has to reckon with} a5 {, when he has only one
wing remaining, although even here after} 20. Kh2 {and g2-g3 his chances are
clearly better}) 19... b5 20. Be3 {, not preventing the opponent from opening
the queenside. After} Reb8 21. Nd2 Be7 22. Qe2 {sooner or later White would
have advanced b2-b4, and with enormous effect, since on this part of the
battlefield he has more pieces. Even so, for Black this was the lesser evil.})
19. g3 {(7) Now White also begins cramping the enemy forces on the kingside.}
Be7 20. h4 Nf6 21. Nh2 Qd7 22. a4 Qh3 {This demonstration of activity was
accompanied by - a peace offer!} ({I should mention that here the blocking of
the queenside by} 22... a5 {was now unattractive in view of} 23. Qf3 {and
Nd1-e3 (preventing ...f7-f5), when Black begins to suffocate.}) 23. Qf3 {(3)}
Qd7 {And this 'backward spurt' is explained by a sober assessment of the
situation after White's declining of the draw.} (23... Bd8 24. a5 Rb8 {and ...b7-b6 (in order to answer axb6 with ...Rxb6) was possibly more resilient, but
in time-trouble it is not easy to take such a committing decision. Georgadze
gives up ideas of counterplay and switches to exclusively passive defence,
relying on the solidity of his pawn chain.} ({Or} 24... b5 25. axb6 Bxb6 {.}))
24. a5 {(2) It becomes obvious that Black has wasted too much time. White
dominates on both wings.} Nf8 ({If} 24... Bd8 {, then} 25. Kg2 {, and} b6 $2
26. axb6 Bxb6 $2 {is no longer possible because of} 27. h5 {and Bxh6.}) 25. Bd2
{(5)} Rec8 26. Nf1 {(11) Black's problem is that, with extremely restricted
space for manoeuvring, he has to parry threats by the far more mobile white
army. Now 27 Ne3 is threatened.} Ng4 {A forced reply: to allow Ne3 would be
too dangerous (and ...g7-g6 would be a new weakening). But now the black queen
is tied to the d7-square, and the switching of the f8-knight to the vicinity
of the queenside has become impossible, which White exploits by immediately
opening up the play on that wing.} 27. Na4 {(7)} Bd8 28. Rec1 Rab8 29. b4 $1 {
The start of the decisive offensive. As they say in such cases, the rest is a
matter of technique.} cxb4 30. Bxb4 h5 ({The quest for success in an open
battle} 30... b5 $2 31. axb6 Bxb6 32. c5 dxc5 33. Bxc5 Bxc5 34. Nxc5 Rxc5 {
would have ended in failure for Black after} 35. Rxc5 Rb2 36. Ne3 Nxf2 37. Rc2
$1 {.}) ({And if the knight deserts its post with} 30... Nf6 31. Ne3 g6 {both}
32. Rcb1 ({and the immediate} 32. c5 $1 {are good.})) 31. Nb6 {A perfectly
safe continuation in the opponent's time-trouble: I did not want to allow
Black even a hint of counterplay.} ({The line I give in 'The Test of Time' -} 
31. Qd3 {(?)} b5 32. axb6 Bxb6 33. Nxb6 (33. c5 Ba7 $1) 33... Rxb6 34. Ba3 {is
less good in view of} Qa7 $1 {with unnecessary complications (} 35. c5 ({or} 
35. Ne3 Nd7) 35... dxc5 36. Rxc5 $6 Nxf2 $1 {).}) ({But} 31. Qa3 $5 {was the
most 'computer-like' way to win:} Bc7 ({or} 31... b5 32. axb6 Bxb6 33. Nxb6 (
33. Bxd6 $5) 33... Rxb6 34. f3 Nf6 (34... Rcb8 35. Bxd6 $1) 35. c5 dxc5 36.
Bxc5 {etc.}) 32. c5 dxc5 33. Nxc5 Qb5 34. f3 Nf6 35. Nd3 Ng6 36. Kg2 {.}) 31...
Bxb6 32. axb6 {Now, if the c-file is opened, the b6-pawn ensures White an
outpost at c7.} Qe7 ({If} 32... Qd8 {again} 33. Qa3 $1 {was very strong;} ({
but not} 33. c5 Nd7 $1) 33... Qxb6 34. Ra2 Rd8 35. Ba5 {and wins.}) 33. Qa3 Rd8
({When your flag is hanging it is hard to decide on a positional exchange
sacrifice -} 33... Rc5 $5 34. Bxc5 dxc5 {, but this would have prolonged the
resistance. However, after} 35. Ne3 (35. f3 Nf6 36. Ne3 {will also do}) 35...
Nxe3 36. Qxe3 Nd7 37. Rcb1 ({or} 37. Qg5 {(the computer)}) ({or perhaps even} 
37. d6 $5 {(my recommendation from 'The Test of Time') White would have
gradually destroyed the opponent's defences.})) 34. f3 {(9)} Nh6 (34... Nf6 35.
Ne3 ({or} 35. c5 {.})) 35. c5 dxc5 36. Bxc5 Qf6 37. Kg2 Re8 38. Be3 Nd7 39.
Rab1 Qe7 {This leads to a loss of material;} ({but it was also impossible to
hold the position after} 39... Rbc8 40. Rc7 Rxc7 41. bxc7 b5 42. Rc1 {.}) 40.
Qxe7 ({And here, without managing to play} 40. Qxe7 Rxe7 {, Black lost on time.
But even without this the obvious} 41. Rc7 {would have led to the immediate
collapse of his position. --- Times: 2.18-2.30.}) 1-0

[Event "35: 47th USSR Championship, Minsk"]
[Site "?"]
[Date "1979.12.02"]
[Round "3"]
[White "Kasparov, G."]
[Black "Yusupov, A."]
[Result "1-0"]
[ECO "C83"]
[Annotator "Garry Kasparov"]
[PlyCount "81"]
[EventDate "1979.??.??"]
[Source "Everyman Chess"]
[SourceDate "2012.11.28"]

{My next win, in the 2nd round against Sveshnikov, was also achieved by solid
positional play, in an 'insipid' endgame with symmetrical pawns (it is true
that I made an error, but my opponent failed to exploit it and I transposed
into a winning pawn ending). --- But in the 3rd round I came out of hiding and
won against Yusupov (who had also started with 2 out of 2) in a style which
one commentator even compared with that of Alekhine. My own commentary was
closer to reality: 'Artur and I are friends; we both studied in Botvinnik's
school. Before this we had played each other only in junior competitions. And
now - our first "adult" encounter, and immediately in the championship of the
country! In Minsk Artur was making his debut in the Premier League, and it
turned out that I, as an "old-timer", was examining him. But I won
surprisingly easily.'} 1. e4 e5 2. Nf3 Nc6 {Before the autumn of that year
Yusupov's repertoire comprised the sharp Chelyabinsk Variation and the quiet
Petroff Defence. But in the First League Artur had already employed the Open
Variation of the Ruy Lopez, which became fashionable after the Karpov-Korchnoi
match (Baguio 1978).} 3. Bb5 a6 4. Ba4 Nf6 5. O-O Nxe4 6. d4 b5 7. Bb3 d5 8.
dxe5 Be6 9. Be3 {At the time this was a rare, little-studied continuation,
which my opponent might not even have looked at in his preparations.} ({The
'main' variations with} 9. c3) (9. Qe2) ({or} 9. Nbd2 Nc5 10. c3 {were
certainly well known to Yusupov.}) 9... Be7 ({The 'Encyclopaedia of Chess
Openings' (1974) promised Black easy equality after} 9... Na5 {, but the game
Kupreichik-Slutsky (Moscow 1979) shook this assessment:} 10. Nd4 Qd7 11. Qe1
Nxb3 (11... Nc6 $5) 12. axb3 Be7 13. b4 c5 14. Nxe6 fxe6 15. f3 {with
advantage to White.}) ({In the early 1980s the move 9 Be3 became popular, and
the 2nd edition of 'ECO' no longer recommended} 9... Na5 {.}) ({On the other
hand,} 9... Bc5 {often occurs, for example:} 10. Qd3 (10. Qe2 $5 O-O 11. Rd1 {
leads to a tabiya of the variation with 9 Qe2}) 10... O-O 11. Nc3 Nb4 12. Qe2
Nxc3 13. bxc3 Bxe3 14. Qxe3 Nc6 15. a4 Na5 (15... Qe7 $5 {, Svidler-Carlsen,
Baku 2008}) 16. axb5 (16. Nd4 {is more interesting}) 16... axb5 17. Qc5 ({or} 
17. Nd4 Qe8 18. f4 c5 {(Kasparov-Kramnik, 4th match game, Moscow 2001)}) 17...
c6 {(Kholmov-Antoshin, 35th USSR Championship, Kharkov 1967) in both cases
with equality.}) 10. Nbd2 ({The theory of this line was in its infancy, and it
was only later that} 10. c3 $1 {was deemed more accurate. After this, apart
from 10...0-0 11 Nbd2 (transposing into a position from the game), Black has
two other possibilities - one more solid ('classical') and one more sharp 
('modern'):} -- (10... Qd7 11. Nbd2 Rd8 (11... Nxd2 12. Qxd2 Na5 13. Bg5 $5 {
, A.Sokolov-Yusupov, Montpellier Candidates 1985}) 12. Re1 O-O 13. Bc2 f5 (
13... Bf5 $5 {is more solid, Dolmatov-Yusupov, 1st match game, Wijk aan Zee
1991}) 14. exf6 Nxf6 15. a4 $1 Ng4 $6 16. axb5 axb5 17. Bd4 Nxd4 {
(Kasparov-Shirov, Izmir 2004)} 18. cxd4 $1 {with advantage to White}) (10...
Nc5 11. Bc2 Nd7 (11... Bg4 12. Nbd2 {with the idea of Qb1}) 12. Re1 ({not} 12.
Bf4 g5 $1) 12... Ndxe5 ({more risky, but more principled than} 12... O-O 13.
Bf4 {, Dolmatov-Yusupov, 7th match game, Wijk aan Zee 1991}) 13. Nxe5 Nxe5 14.
Bd4 f6 ({or} 14... Ng6 {(a fresh example: Balogh-Mikhalevsky, Olympiad,
Khanty-Mansiysk 2010), and for the moment Black parries all the attacks.})))
10... O-O (10... Nc5 $1 {is more accurate, and if} 11. c3 Nd3 $1 {,
Panchenko-Tukmakov, Tashkent 1980.}) 11. c3 {(19) And so after all the game
transposes into a line of the old variation with 9 c3.} (11. Nxe4 {is
altogether harmless:} dxe4 12. Bxe6 fxe6 13. Qxd8 (13. Nd2 Qd5 14. Qg4 Nxe5 15.
Qxe4 Rad8) 13... Raxd8 14. Nd2 Nxe5 15. Nxe4 Nc4 {.}) 11... Bg4 (11... Nxd2 12.
Qxd2 Qd7) ({or} 11... Qd7 {is considered more or less reliable. However, in my
opinion, the bishop move is also better than its tarnished reputation.}) 12.
Nxe4 {(5)} (12. h3 {is interesting:} Nxd2 13. hxg4 $5 ({instead of the ancient
} 13. Qxd2 Bxf3 14. gxf3 Nxe5 {, Leffmann-Gunsberg, Nuremberg 1883}) 13... Nxf1
({after} 13... Nxf3+ 14. gxf3 Nxe5 15. Qxd5 {the two bishops give White some
advantage}) 14. Kxf1 Na5 15. Bxd5 c6 16. Be4 {with compensation for the
exchange (Smagin-Kotliar, Philadelphia 1989).}) 12... dxe4 13. Qd5 ({White has
no particular choice:} 13. Bd5 Nxe5 $1 {is equal (Geller-Korchnoi, Curaçao
Candidates 1962).} ({As it later transpired, the further lines with} 13... exf3
) ({and} 13... Qxd5 {were briefly considered in the 'ECO' of that time. But at
the board, both players, beginning with 10 Nbd2, were playing 'at sight' and
with each move were 'reinventing the wheel'...})) 13... exf3 ({After the game
Artur maintained that the endgame after} 13... Qxd5 14. Bxd5 exf3 15. Bxc6 fxg2
{was safe for Black. This is not altogether so: in the event of} 16. Kxg2 (16.
Rfc1 Rab8 $1 {, Sadvakasov-Korchnoi, 2nd match game, Astana 2003}) 16... -- (
16... Rad8 {the typical undermining move} 17. a4 {gives White a small but
enduring advantage (Alekhine-Teichmann, 4th match game, Berlin 1921).}) (16...
Rab8 $5 {is more interesting} 17. -- ({, with the idea of} 17. a4 bxa4 $1 18.
Rxa4 Be2 {with equality}) ({, while if} 17. h3 {(Adams-Fressinet, Bastia 2005),
then} Be6 $1 18. f4 f6 {.}) ({. Or} 17. b4 f6 $1 18. Bd5+ $5 (18. f4 Rbd8 {
with equality, Kosteniuk-Ernst, Wijk aan Zee 2005}) 18... Kh8 19. f3 Bf5 20. e6
Bd6 21. Rfe1 Rfe8 {, and White is probably unable to break through.}))) 14.
Qxc6 fxg2 15. Qxg2 Qd7 16. Bh6 $1 {(12) After some thought, I found this
garish move;} ({without it White has no hopes of an advantage:} 16. Qg3 Rad8
17. f3 Bf5 {with equality (Wolf-Tarrasch, Mährisch Ostrau 1923). The
unexpected turn of events - now a kind of tactical commotion begins -
unsettled Artur: he sank into thought and on the next move but one he
committed a fatal mistake!}) 16... gxh6 17. f3 (17. e6 {is unproductive:} fxe6
18. Qxg4+ Kh8 19. Qxe6 Qxe6 20. Bxe6 Bc5 21. Rae1 Rae8 {with equality 
(Michel-Najdorf, Mar del Plata 1941).}) 17... h5 $2 {This leads to disaster 
(how high the value of a move is in an open position!). Intuitively I realised
this immediately, on seeing the main weakness of Black's position - the
vulnerability of his bishop on e7 and his f7-point.} (17... Bc5+ $6 18. Kh1
Rae8 {(suggested in 'ECO') is also inadequate:} 19. Rae1 Qc6 20. Re4 $1 {and
fxg4 with powerful pressure}) ({as is} 17... Kh8 $6 18. fxg4 h5 (18... Rg8 19.
h3 h5 $2 20. Rad1 $1) 19. Rxf7 $1 Bc5+ 20. Kh1 Qxg4 21. Qxg4 hxg4 22. Rxc7 {
with an extra pawn.}) ({However, the accurate} 17... Rae8 $1 {(completing
development and threatening 18...Bc5+ 19 Kh1 Rxe5)} 18. Rae1 $1 h5 (18... Bh4
$6 19. Re2) 19. Kh1 Qc6 {would have enabled Black to fight for equality:} 20.
-- (20. fxg4 Qxg2+ 21. Kxg2 Rd8 $1) ({, or} 20. Re4 Rd8 ({but not} 20... Bd6 $2
21. exd6 Rxe4 22. fxe4 {and wins, Nunn-Heidrich, Bundesliga 1985}) 21. fxg4 Rd2
$1 {.}) ({. Therefore} 20. Re2 {is better, although here too after} Kg7 21.
fxg4 Qxg2+ 22. Rxg2 h4 23. Rgf2 f6 24. e6 Rd8 {White's achievements are slight.
--- It follows that not only 13...Qxd5 but also 13...exf3 is acceptable for
Black, but here psychology played its part: after this game the variation
disappeared from grandmaster play.})) 18. Rad1 $1 {(3) Only this, it turns
out, is a novelty.} ({Too little is given by} 18. fxg4 $2 Qxg4 19. Qxg4+ hxg4
20. Rf4 {(Acosta-Szmetan, Bogota 1978)} Rae8 {with equality.}) 18... Qf5 ({
After} 18... Qc6 19. fxg4 Qxg2+ 20. Kxg2 Rad8 (20... hxg4 $2 21. Rd7) 21. Rxd8
Bxd8 22. gxh5 c5 23. Bd5 {Black has an extremely difficult endgame (} Bc7 $2
24. e6 $1 {, Cs.Horvath-Zlatohlavek, Gausdal 1986).}) 19. fxg4 Qxe5 {It is
hard to attach a question mark to this move;} ({the defence after} 19... Qxg4
20. Rd7 Rae8 21. Rxc7 {must have seemed very thankless to Yusupov.}) 20. Rde1
$1 {(16) The decisive move.} ({In contrast to} 20. Rxf7 $2 Kh8 $1) ({or} 20.
Rf5 $2 Qe3+ 21. Kh1 hxg4 22. Qxg4+ Kh8 {with equality. --- Black's downfall is
caused by the open position of his king and the uncoordinated state of his
pieces. Surprisingly, although he would appear to have a tempo for the defence,
it is no longer possible to do anything.}) 20... Qc5+ (20... Qd6 21. Rxf7 $1) (
{or} 20... Qg5 21. Rf5 Qh4 22. Re4 $1 Kh8 23. g5 {is bad for Black)}) 21. Kh1
Rad8 {This loses a piece, but what can Black play?} (21... Rae8 {will not do:}
22. Rf5 Qb6 23. gxh5+ Kh8 24. Rxf7 Rxf7 (24... Bf6 25. Rxh7+) ({or} 24... Rg8
25. Rexe7 $1 Rxe7 26. Qg7+ $3 {is more picturesque}) 25. Bxf7 Rf8 26. Rg1 Qxg1+
{(otherwise mate)} 27. Qxg1 $1 Rxf7 28. h6 {.}) ({White also has a decisive
attack after} 21... Bh4 22. Rf5 Qd6 23. Ref1 {(g1)}) ({or} 21... Bd6 22. Rf5
Qa7 23. gxh5+ Kh8 24. Rg1 Rg8 25. Rg5 {.}) ({And after} 21... c6 {, which is
slightly more resilient} 22. -- (22. Rf5 Qd6 23. gxh5+ Kh8 24. Bxf7 {is good
for White}) ({, as is} 22. Qe4 Bh4 ({or} 22... Ra7 23. Rf5 Qd6 24. Rd1 Qh6 25.
gxh5) (22... Bd8 23. Rxf7 $1 Rxf7 24. Bxf7+) 23. Rf5 Qd6 24. Ref1 Qe7 (24...
Ra7 25. gxh5) 25. Qc2 $1 {, also with crushing threats.})) 22. Rf5 Qd6 23. Rd5
Qg6 24. Rxe7 {Already here the curtain could have been lowered, but Artur,
dismayed by such a blitzkrieg, played on through inertia.} Rxd5 25. Bxd5 hxg4
26. Qe4 {(4)} Qxe4+ 27. Bxe4 Rd8 28. Rxc7 h5 29. Bc2 {(3)} Rd5 30. Bb3 Rf5 31.
Kg2 a5 32. Rxf7 $1 {(10) Not essential, but flamboyant and effective:
transposing into a pawn endgame is the quickest way to force capitulation.}
Rxf7 33. Kg3 a4 34. Bxf7+ Kxf7 35. Kh4 Kg6 36. b3 a3 37. c4 bxc4 38. bxc4 Kf5
39. Kxh5 Ke4 40. Kxg4 Kd4 41. h4 {. White's pawn queens two moves earlier. ---
Times: 2.14-2.24. --- A hat-trick, as in Minsk 1978! From the press: 'The
championship of the country began with a sensation - after three rounds the
leader was Kasparov with a 100% result! His initial three convincing wins
largely set the tone of the entire competition.' --- Then Kupreichik burst
ahead, scoring five successive wins. Meanwhile I slowed down, making six draws
- with Rashkovsky, Geller, Romanishin, Makarychev, Razuvaev and Tseshkovsky,
although the play in these games was far from peaceful. --- Nikitin: 'The
congratulations with which we were showered after this stunning start put the
youngster in a state of euphoria, and working with him became difficult. His
following opponents displayed great tenacity in defence, and after six
successive draws the euphoria was replaced by irritation. Directives and calls
for a little patience did not help.'} (41. -- {After nine rounds there were
four leaders - Kasparov, Kupreichik, Balashov and Yusupov. On the rest day I
tried to divert myself from my tournament misfortunes - first I gave a
'planned' simul' in the Polytechnic Institute, and then in the evening Nikitin
and I went to the cinema and watched an old American classic The Vikings 
(later my mother complained that it had 'over-excited' me). --- For the
10th-round game with Lerner I arrived in a fighting mood and in a complicated
battle I gained a decisive advantage. But in my opponent's desperate
time-trouble I suddenly became nervous and, although I still had nearly 50
minutes (!) on my clock, with my impulsive 36th move I ruined the fruits of
the preceding intensive work, and then I altogether lost control over the
situation and contrived to lose. --- This cruel defeat signified the onset of
a crisis, similar to that which occurred with me a year earlier in Tbilisi,
between rounds 7 and 9. It is evident that at the age of 15-16 the burden of
leading such a super-tournament as the USSR Championship Premier League was as
yet more than my nervous system could bear. My play went to pieces, and the
result of each subsequent game become unpredictable.}) 1-0

[Event "36: 47th USSR Championship, Minsk"]
[Site "?"]
[Date "1979.12.22"]
[Round "14"]
[White "Kasparov, G."]
[Black "Kupreichik, V."]
[Result "1-0"]
[ECO "D15"]
[Annotator "Garry Kasparov"]
[PlyCount "89"]
[EventDate "1979.??.??"]
[Source "Everyman Chess"]
[SourceDate "2012.11.28"]

{In the 11th round I should have lost to Vaganian, but by some miracle I
managed to hold out and then win in the endgame. In the 12th round I had an
overwhelming advantage against Anikaev, but I again went wrong and earned a
second nought. In the 13th round I obtained a good position with Black against
Beliavsky - and I lost literally in one move! A disaster! --- The crowning
point of this nightmarish period was my 14th-round game with Viktor Kupreichik,
in which with White I rushed headlong into battle.} 1. d4 d5 2. c4 c6 3. Nf3
Nf6 4. Nc3 dxc4 5. e4 b5 6. e5 Nd5 7. a4 e6 8. axb5 Nxc3 9. bxc3 cxb5 10. Ng5
Bb7 11. Qh5 Qd7 (11... g6 12. Qg4 {- Game No.1 in Volume III of 'My Great
Predecessors')}) 12. Nxh7 $2 {(2)} ({Oh horrors: in a new variation for me I
forgot to include the obligatory} 12. Be2 $1 {and only after} Bd5 ({while if} 
12... h6 {, then} 13. Bf3 $1 {(Kasparov-Petursson, Olympiad, Malta 1980)}) 13.
Nxh7 {.}) 12... Nc6 13. Nxf8 (13. Be3 Qd5 $1 {with the idea of} 14. Be2 Qxg2
15. Rf1 Nb4 $1 {was little better for White.}) (13. Qh4 Nxd4 $1 {.}) ({
Alexander Nikitin describes the acute sufferings he experienced that evening: 
'The demonstrator, after removing the bishop from f8, had only just placed the
white knight there, when I felt a shiver down my spine: the move} 13. Nxf8 Qxd4
$3 {immediately came to mind. The inevitability of White's defeat after} 14.
cxd4 Rxh5 {seemed so obvious, that my heart missed a beat and I reached in my
pocket for a vasodilator. "What a terrible run of misfortune the ill-fated
game with Lerner has produced", I thought to myself. I looked at the stage,
glanced at the culprit of my sufferings, and I immediately realised that he
too had seen the opponent's knock-out blow. --- 'However, when he saw this
Garry unexpectedly quickly composed himself and took the psychologically
correct decision. He did not jump up and walk around the stage, as he would
have often done before, but with an imperturbable and perhaps even
self-confident appearance he remained seated, demonstrating his readiness to
continue the 'blitz'. Five minutes passed, then ten... Kupreichik sat and
thought. Although after his brilliant start he had also become becalmed and
was now almost on his last legs, it was hard to believe that this
sharp-sighted and clever tactician would not notice the queen sacrifice... ---
'A further ten tiring minutes passed, and I was now almost reconciled to the
inevitable. Sitting alongside me in the hall was Borya Gelfand, the future
famous grandmaster, but then a young first category player, whom I had been
recommended to watch at the Petrosian school, and he suddenly asked in a
perplexed whisper: "But what if Black takes the pawn with his queen?" Oh God!
I went out into the foyer. Another half hour of torment rushed by
imperceptibly, but when I returned to the hall Kupreichik had still not made a
move. He was sitting calmly at the board, like a sphinx, hardly changing his
pose. Only now he looked less cheerful, and in his bearing there was a hint of
uncertainty. Perhaps he might not see it?! And indeed, without satisfaction
Viktor finally made a move - he took the queen with his rook...'}) 13... Rxh5
$2 14. Nxd7 Kxd7 15. Rb1 $1 a6 16. Bxc4 Na5 17. Bf1 {(8) And on the 45th move
Black resigned...} Be4 18. Rb4 Bd5 19. f3 Rc8 20. Bd2 Bc4 21. g4 Rh4 22. Bg5
Rhh8 23. Bxc4 Rxc4 24. Rxc4 bxc4 25. Kf2 Nc6 26. h4 Rb8 27. Ra1 Rb2+ 28. Ke1 a5
29. Ra4 Rb1+ 30. Kf2 Rb2+ 31. Kg3 Rb3 32. Rxc4 Ra3 33. Kf4 a4 34. Ke4 Na5 35.
Rc5 Nb3 36. Rb5 Kc6 37. Rb4 Ra1 38. Be3 Na5 39. c4 a3 40. d5+ Kd7 41. Ra4 Nb3
42. Ra7+ Ke8 43. d6 a2 44. d7+ Ke7 45. Bg5+ {. Times: 2.00-2.31. --- When in
analysis after the game I showed Kupreichik 13...Qxd4, he almost jumped out of
his seat! A real chess drama... Nikitin: 'Some four hours later we met Garik,
who had not yet recovered from his sufferings, but was happy and content after
an accurately conducted ending and a much needed win. "Well done, Garinka, you
didn't let on", said his mother about the oversight on the 13th (!) move.
"You're growing up, lad", I added intentionally rather crudely. Yes, that
evening the chess goddess Caissa graciously gave her young knight a helping
hand...' --- After this win the tournament no longer seemed so brutally
exhausting. Three rounds before the finish, the slump suddenly came to an end.
The following day without any particular anxiety I drew with Black against
Balashov.} 1-0

[Event "37: 47th USSR Championship, Minsk"]
[Site "?"]
[Date "1979.12.24"]
[Round "16"]
[White "Kasparov, G."]
[Black "Dolmatov, S."]
[Result "1-0"]
[ECO "D14"]
[Annotator "Garry Kasparov"]
[PlyCount "129"]
[EventDate "1979.??.??"]
[Source "Everyman Chess"]
[SourceDate "2012.11.28"]

{But in the 16th round, to be in contention for a medal I had to beat another
acquaintance from the Botvinnik School and junior competitions - the
20-year-old debutant in the championship Sergey Dolmatov, the winner of the
First League and the world junior champion the previous year. Although in this
tournament he was not performing very successfully, any kind of surprise could
be expected of him.} 1. d4 d5 2. c4 c6 3. Nf3 Nf6 4. cxd5 ({Why not} 4. Nc3 {
(Game Nos. 36, 65, 66, 82, 93)? At that time many ideas were floating about in
the Exchange Variation and it was not a drawing line, but a way of avoiding
the Meran Variation, which for the moment the Dvoretsky-Yusupov-Dolmatov team
knew better than I did.}) 4... cxd5 5. Nc3 Nc6 6. Bf4 Bf5 (6... e6 {is more
passive}) ({while transposing into the Chebanenko Variation by} 6... a6 $5 {
acquired 'citizen's rights' only in the 1980s.}) 7. e3 e6 8. Bb5 Bd6 (8... Bb4
$6 9. Ne5 {is less good for Black (Game No.75 in Volume II of 'My Great
Predecessors')}) ({while the main defence is} 8... Nd7 9. Qa4 (9. O-O Be7 {-
Game No.74 in Volume III of 'My Great Predecessors'}) 9... Rc8 (9... Qb6 10.
Nh4) 10. O-O ({little is promised by} 10. Bxc6 Rxc6 11. Qxa7 Qc8 $1) 10... a6
11. Bxc6 Rxc6 12. Rfc1 Be7 13. Nd1 ({if} 13. Ne2 {, then} Qb6 $1 14. Rxc6 bxc6
{with equality}) 13... b5 14. Qb3 Qc8 ({or} 14... Rc4 {with double-edged play.
However, the move in the game is also, perhaps, not so bad.})) 9. Ne5 {(10)}
Rc8 {In principle this is a loss of time, and Black should try to solve the
problem of the c6-point in other ways.} (9... Bxe5 10. Bxc6+ ({after} 10. Bxe5
Rc8 {White's only hopes lie with his two bishops}) 10... bxc6 11. Bxe5 O-O 12.
Bxf6 $5 (12. O-O Nd7 13. Bd6 Re8 {is equal - Kottnauer-Trifunovic, Beverwijk
1962; Andersson-Yusupov, Linares 1983}) 12... Qxf6 13. O-O e5 {(Vera-Bellon,
Malaga 1981)} ({or} 13... Rab8 {and ...e6-e5 - despite the chronic weakness of
his c6-pawn and the c5-square, Black is close to equality})) (9... O-O $5 {(an
interesting pawn sacrifice)} 10. Bxc6 bxc6 11. Nxc6 Qd7 12. Bxd6 (12. Ne5 Qb7
$1) 12... Qxd6 13. Ne5 (13. Qa4 Nd7 $1) 13... Rab8 14. g4 $5 ({if} 14. Qd2 {,
then} Qb4 15. b3 Rfc8 {is good}) 14... Bg6 15. Nxg6 fxg6 $5 16. Rb1 e5 {with
active play, although for the moment White retains his extra material.}) 10.
Bxc6+ {(14) Giving Black a backward pawn.} ({After} 10. O-O {there can follow}
Bxe5 11. Bxe5 O-O {(H.Olafsson-Yusupov, Reykjavik 1985).}) 10... bxc6 11. O-O
O-O 12. Rc1 Qe7 ({The attempt to get rid of the weakness by} 12... c5 $2 {does
not work because of} 13. Nb5 {.}) 13. Na4 {(14)} Bxe5 14. Bxe5 Nd7 15. Nc5 {
(11)} (15. Bg3 {would nevertheless have allowed} c5 {.}) 15... f6 ({The strong
bishop should probably have been exchanged -} 15... Nxe5 16. dxe5 -- ({, and
now after both} 16... Rb8 17. Qd4 h5 ({or} 17... Rb5 {(Malinichev-Zargarian,
Volodarsky 2007)} 18. f3 $1) 18. b4) ({, and} 16... f6 17. Qd4 fxe5 18. Qxe5
Qc7 19. f4 ({or} 19. Qxc7 Rxc7 20. f3 {Black merely has slightly the worse
chances, whereas the move in the game adds to his problems. Dolmatov was
hoping to set up a counterattack on the kingside, but White's attack on the
queenside develops more quickly.}))) 16. Bg3 e5 17. Qd2 {(with the obvious
intention of Rc3 and Rfc1)} Nb6 $6 {All in the same risky, 'counterattacking'
spirit - Black also avoids the exchange of knights.} (17... Rfe8 {was better.})
18. b3 e4 $6 ({Black somehow cannot bring himself to return his knight with} 
18... Nd7 {.}) ({In 'Informator' I recommended} 18... h5 {, since in the event
of} 19. h4 {Black would have subsequently gained an opportunity to exploit the
weakening of the kingside. But after the immediate closing of the centre he
has an objectively difficult position.}) 19. Na6 (19. Rc2 $5 {.}) 19... h5 20.
Qb4 {(8)} Qb7 21. Nc5 Qe7 22. a4 {(6)} g5 $6 ({It was more resilient first to
minimise the threat of a4-a5, by prophylactically defending the queen and
vacating the f8-square for the knight:} 22... Rfe8 23. a5 Nd7 24. Na6 Nf8 {,
and if} 25. Bd6 {then} Qf7 26. Nb8 Bd7 27. Rc2 h4 28. h3 Ne6 29. Rfc1 Nd8) ({
or even better} 22... Rf7 $5 23. a5 Nd7 24. Na6 Nf8 {, practically forcing the
transition into an endgame -} 25. Qxe7 (25. Bd6 $6 Qb7 $1) 25... Rxe7 {,
although even here after} 26. Nb4 Bd7 27. Rc2 {and Rfc1 Black would face a
cheerless defence. Therefore in search of counter-chances Dolmatov aimed at
any cost to keep the queens on.}) 23. a5 Na8 ({Now after} 23... Nd7 24. Na6 $1
{the exchange of queens is fatal for Black (the knight on d7 has taken the
square for the bishop, from where it could defend the c6-pawn), while in the
event of} Qf7 25. Bc7 ({or} 25. Bd6 Rfd8 26. Qb7 {it is also hard to offer him
any good advice.})) 24. Na6 $1 Qe8 $6 25. Rc2 h4 26. Bd6 Rf7 27. Rfc1 {
(threatening Nb8 - White already has a decisive advantage)} Rg7 28. Nb8 $1 Bd7
29. Qb7 {(10)} Kh7 $1 {A brilliant reply!} ({I was sure that the game was
decided:} 29... Qe6 30. Nxd7 Qxd7 31. Qxd7 Rxd7 32. Rxc6 {etc. But all is not
yet so simple.}) 30. Qxa8 {(4)} ({It was also possible not to lose time on the
capture of the 'dead' knight, for example:} 30. b4 {(threatening b4-b5)} -- (
30... Qe6 31. Nxd7 Rd8 (31... Qxd7 32. Qxd7) 32. Nxf6+ ({but} 32. Rxc6 $1 {is
simpler}) 32... Qxf6 33. Be5 Qxe5 34. Qxa8 {suggested by me in 'Informator'}) (
{, or} 30... Qd8 31. Qxa7 ({only not} 31. b5 $4 Bg4 $1) 31... Be8 32. Qc5 Rxb8
(32... Rb7 33. Na6) 33. Bxb8 Qxb8 34. b5 Nc7 35. bxc6 {and wins})) (30. Qxa7 $5
Qe6 31. Ba3 {(the most accurate: White has won a pawn and retained his
powerful bishop)} h3 ({or} 31... Be8 32. Qxa8 h3 33. g3 Qf5 34. f3 exf3 35. Kf2
) 32. Nxd7 Rxd7 33. Qa6 Rdc7 34. gxh3 {, repelling the desperate attack (} Qxh3
35. Bd6 $1 {) and winning.}) 30... Qe6 31. Qxa7 $1 {White is obliged to return
the piece, giving up his fine bishop.} ({It would be suicidal to play} 31. Rxc6
$4 Bxc6 32. Rxc6 Rd8 $1 {, when he cannot disentangle himself without losing
material (} 33. Bc7 Qg4 34. Rc1 Rc8 $1 {).}) ({And if} 31. Bc5 $2 {, then} Be8
$1 {with dangerous counterplay:} 32. Bxa7 (32. Bf8 Rf7) ({or} 32. Rf1 h3 33. f4
exf3 34. Rxf3 hxg2 35. Rxg2 Bg6 $1 {and ...Be4}) 32... h3 33. Bc5 Qg4 34. f3
exf3 35. g3 Qe4 $1 36. Kf2 f5 {and f5-f4.}) 31... Qxd6 32. Nxd7 Rxd7 33. Qb6 (
33. Qa6 $5 Rdc7 34. h3 Qd7 ({or} 34... f5 35. Qe2 Kg6 36. Rc5) 35. b4 {was
also good.}) 33... Rdc7 34. a6 {(6)} (34. b4 Qe6 {(d7)} 35. b5 $1 {etc. would
have won more simply.}) 34... Qd7 {Sergey was already in serious time-trouble.}
({If} 34... h3 {the correct reply is} 35. b4 $1 {.}) 35. Ra1 $2 {(2) A
serious delay.} ({There was still a win by} 35. b4 h3 36. gxh3 (36. g3 Qg4 37.
Kf1 Qf3 38. a7 $1 {is also possible}) 36... Qxh3 37. b5 Qg4+ 38. Kf1 Qh3+ (
38... Kg6 39. a7) 39. Ke1 Qxh2 40. Qa5 Qh1+ 41. Kd2 Qh2 42. Kd1 {and b5-b6.})
35... h3 {'Black has defended cleverly and created real counterplay.' 
(Yudovich)} 36. gxh3 {(9)} Kg6 $5 {Vacating the h-file for the rook and
leaving the queen to defend against the advance of the a-pawn.} ({In the event
of} 36... Qxh3 37. -- ({, nothing would have been given by either} 37. Rca2 f5
$1 {and ...f5-f4}) ({, or} 37. b4 Qg4+ 38. Kf1 Qf3 $1 39. Rca2 (39. Rac1 f5 $1)
39... Kg6 $1 40. a7 Rh7 41. Qb8 $1 Rch8 $1 {(with the threat of ...Rxh2)} 42.
Kg1 Rxa7 $1 {.}) ({. However,} 37. a7 $1 Qd7 {(there is nothing else)} 38. h3
Ra8 (38... Rb7 39. Qa6) 39. Kg2 Kg6 40. Ra6 {and Rxc6 (while if} Rh8 {, then
first} 41. Kf1 $1 {) would have led after exchanges to a rook endgame with an
extra pawn for White (and drawing chances for Black).})) 37. f3 {(12) An
impulsive advance with the opponent's flag about to fall.} ({After} 37. b4 Rh8
$1 {I could no longer see a win:} 38. -- (38. b5 Rxh3 39. f3 exf3 40. a7 Rc8
41. a8=Q (41. bxc6 Qg4+ 42. Kf1 Rg3 $1) 41... Rxa8 42. Rxa8 f2+ 43. Rxf2 Qg4+)
({, or} 38. Rac1 Rxh3 39. Rxc6 (39. Kf1 Rxh2) 39... Rxc6 40. Qxc6 Qg4+ 41. Kf1
Rxe3 $1 42. Qe8+ Kh6 {with a draw.}) (38. a7 {was also very unclear:} Rcc8 $5
39. h4 Rxh4 40. Qb8 Rhh8 41. Qg3 Rh3 $1 42. Qg2 Rh4 43. f3 Ra8 44. Rca2 Qf5 {
with counterplay.})) ({Apparently the immediate} 37. a7 $5 {was better, and if}
Ra8 38. Kg2 Raxa7 39. Rxa7 Rxa7 40. Qxc6 {, although after} Qf5 41. Qe8+ Rf7
42. Rc1 Qf3+ 43. Kg1 Qxh3 {the open position of White's king makes it
extremely hard for him to convert his extra pawn.}) 37... exf3 38. Rf2 {(4)}
Ra7 $2 {An error in reply.} (38... c5 {(?), given by me in 'Informator', is
also insufficient in view of} 39. Rxf3 Rc6 40. Qb5 cxd4 41. Qd3+ $1 {.}) ({
However,} 38... Qxh3 $1 {would have led to a draw:} 39. a7 Qg4+ ({or} 39... Re7
{immediately}) 40. Kf1 (40. Kh1 $6 {is worse:} Rh7 $1 {- with the threats of ...Rxh2+ and ...Qg3 -} 41. Qb8 $1 Rhh8 42. Qd6 Qe4 $1) 40... Qh3+ 41. Ke1 Re7 $1
42. a8=Q Rxa8 43. Rxa8 Qg4 44. Kf1 Rxe3 45. Qb4 Qh3+ 46. Kg1 Qg4+ {with
perpetual check.}) 39. Rxf3 {Now Black is simply 'one and a half' pawns down
and without any counterplay.} Rca8 40. b4 {With the terrible threat of b4-b5.}
Qc7 $1 {With his last move before the time control Dolmatov demonstrates
tenacious defence. --- Here the game was adjourned and the arbiter asked me to
seal my move. The resumption took place the following day.} 41. Qc5 $2 {(17)} (
{I had not yet calmed down after the time scramble, and with this sealed move
I again put in jeopardy the win, which could have been achieved in the rook
endgame after} 41. Qxc7 Rxc7 42. e4 $1 Rca7 $1 (42... dxe4 43. Rc3) 43. Raf1
Rf8 44. e5 Rxa6 (44... f5 45. h4 $1) 45. Rxf6+ Rxf6 46. Rxf6+ Kg7 47. b5 Ra4
48. Rxc6 Rxd4 49. b6 Rb4 50. Kf2 {(say,} Rb3 51. Ke2 Kf7 52. Kd2 Rxh3 53. Rc8 {
and wins). --- The only plus point of my decision was that it came as a
surprise to my opponent, whereas I was armed 'to the teeth' and during the
adjournment session I spent only 9 minutes!}) 41... Rxa6 42. Raf1 Ra2 ({If} 
42... Qd8 {my trainers and I had prepared} 43. h4 $1 {with the idea of} gxh4
44. Qc2+ Kg7 45. Qg2+ Kf7 46. Qg5 {and wins.}) 43. Rxf6+ Kh5 44. R1f2 Rxf2 ({
After} 44... Qh7 45. Qxc6 {White wins.}) 45. Rxf2 Qh7 46. Qc2 Ra1+ $2 {This
attempt to create counter-chances in the rook ending proves unsuccessful.} (
46... Qe7 $1 {was far more resilient - this was the only problematic spot in
our adjournment analysis. Here I did not see a clear win, neither do I see one
now, although after} 47. Qd1+ Kg6 (47... Kh6 $6 48. Qf3 $1) 48. Qc1 {White has
a clear advantage.}) 47. Kg2 Qe4+ (47... Qe7 {is too late in view of} 48. Qf5
$1 {with the idea of Rc2 or Rf4.}) (47... Qxc2 {is also hopeless:} 48. Rxc2 Re1
(48... Ra6 49. Kg3) 49. Kf2 Rh1 50. Rxc6 Rxh2+ 51. Kg3 {.}) 48. Qxe4 dxe4 {'A
rook endgame has been reached. To win, first and foremost White needs to
activate his forces.' (Yudovich)} 49. d5 $1 {The key idea of our home analysis,
of which I was very proud.} ({However, there was also a win by} 49. Rc2 Kh4 50.
d5 $1 cxd5 51. Rb2 Ra6 52. b5 Rb6 53. Rb4 g4 54. hxg4 Kxg4 55. h3+ {.}) 49...
cxd5 50. Rb2 Ra6 51. b5 Rb6 52. Kg3 Kg6 53. Kg4 Kf6 54. Rb4 $1 Kg6 55. h4 {
White creates another passed pawn, on the opposite wing, and he will be
prepared to sacrifice it at a convenient moment, in order to divert the
opponent's forces.} gxh4 56. Kxh4 Kf5 57. Kg3 Rg6+ ({Two other lines from our
analysis:} 57... Ke5 58. h4 Kd6 (58... Rg6+ 59. Kh3) 59. Kf4 Kc5 60. Rb1 d4 61.
Kxe4 (61. exd4+ {is also good}) 61... Re6+ 62. Kf5 Rxe3 63. b6 Re8 64. b7 Rb8
65. Ke4) (57... Kg5 58. h4+ Kf5 59. h5 Kg5 60. h6 $1 Rxh6 61. b6 Rh8 62. b7 Rb8
63. Rb5 Kf6 64. Kf4 Ke6 65. Rb6+ Kd7 66. Ke5 Kc7 67. Rb4 {and in each case
White wins.}) 58. Kf2 Rh6 59. b6 $1 Rxh2+ 60. Ke1 Rh8 61. b7 Rb8 62. Kd2 Ke5
63. Kc3 d4+ ({I was especially proud of the following precise variation which
we found:} 63... Kd6 64. Kd4 Kc6 65. Rb1 Kd6 66. Rb6+ Kc7 67. Kc5 (67. Rb5 $5)
67... d4 68. Rc6+ $1 Kd7 69. Kb6 $1 dxe3 70. Rc4 $1 {and wins.}) 64. exd4+ Kd5
(64... Kf4 {would not have saved Black:} 65. Kc4 (65. Rb6 $5) 65... Kf3 66. d5
e3 67. Kd3 e2 68. Re4 Rxb7 69. Re3+ Kf4 70. Rxe2 {.}) 65. Kd2 {. Times: 2.
55-3.07.} (65. -- {Just like a year earlier in Tbilisi, I concluded the
tournament with a game against Mikhail Tal. On top of the previous year's
'gold', in 1979 he had also gained triumphal victories at the 'tournament of
stars' in Montreal (together with Karpov), and at the Interzonal Tournament in
Riga. However, in this championship the ex-world champion (and a Candidate in
the current cycle!) was unrecognisable and he looked exhausted from his
efforts in the tournament. Up to the 14th round Tal was still holding out and
he was on 'plus one', but he was struck down by a very bad cold (he was
coughing so terribly on the stage, that with a smile he even asked the chief
arbiter: 'Salo Mikhailovich, put up a curtain, so that I don't infect the
public'), and after three successive losses he dropped into the lower half of
the tournament table. --- The placing of the leaders before the 17th round was
as follows: Geller - 11, Yusupov - 10, Balashov, Kasparov and Makarychev - 9½. On the concluding day all drew their games, apart from Makarychev, who lost
with Black to Beliavsky and finished half a step behind. --- From the press:
'The hero of the second half of the tournament was Geller. Going through
undefeated, he repeated his success of nearly quarter of a century earlier and
he established an unusual record: never before in the championships of the
country had the winner been older than fifty! (In 1937 Levenfish was 49.)
Kasparov, who shared 3rd-4th places, scored as many wins as the tournament
winner - six, but he also lost three games. His result is also a record -
never before in the championships of the country has a schoolboy won a medal.'}
) (65. -- {Soon afterwards grandmaster Salo Flohr wrote this in the magazine
'64': 'Regarding our brilliant talent (wunderkind?) Garik Kasparov I have
heard many good words, and I know his games. Here for the first time I had the
opportunity and the great pleasure of seeing him play. Garik is like a fire at
the chess board. He is impulsive (to his misfortune, sometimes excessively).
He passionately loves chess, and he clearly prefers to play for a win. But how
he suffers after a loss! He loses his appetite and he can't sleep, which,
however, is not good. --- 'Kasparov and Yusupov are good lads (and not only
because they occupied high places). I very much liked it when Kasparov would
not agree that he could have finished first. He objected: no, no, Geller
played more strongly. Yusupov had this to say: for everything that I know
about chess I am indebted to my trainer Mark Dvoretsky. Kasparov very
flatteringly and with gratitude referred to his prestigious chess teacher
Mikhail Botvinnik. --- 'Incidentally, the youngster's current helpers did not
hide the fact that the ex-world champion gave Kasparov valuable long-distance
consultation and directives. According to Botvinnik's plan, Kasparov should
have finished in the top six. The young man violated this directive by sharing
3rd-4th places with Balashov. Will Kasparov get into trouble from his strict
teacher for this "violation"? In the 46th championship he was ninth, and in
the 47th - 3rd-4th. What leap will Garry perform in the current, Olympic year?
The following expression exists: five minutes away from being a grandmaster.
In my opinion, this expression is not appropriate for Kasparov, and about him
it would be more correct to say: five seconds away from being a grandmaster.'})
(65. -- {And on the pages of the magazine 'Shakhmaty v SSSR' the championship
was reviewed by another veteran of the chess scene - international master
Mikhail Yudovich: 'A number of games were excellently conducted by Botvinnik's
pupil Garry Kasparov. Of course, this is a player who has a brilliant future.
Of Kasparov's deficiencies we must mention effusiveness typical of his age, a
striving to force events, and at times a certain recklessness. But in time all
this will calm down and be put into place. I think I will not be wrong if I
say that each new appearance by Garik will attract the attention of the entire
chess world. It is probable that at the age of 16 no one has ever achieved
such results, demonstrating versatile and resourceful play, such as that, for
example, against Dolmatov. --- 'When in the games of a young player we see
swift attacks, sacrifices and combinations, this pleases, but does not
surprise us. Such bursts are natural and are even to be expected. But when a
16-year-old player conducts a heavyweight battle, demonstrating strategic
accuracy, tactical resourcefulness and fine technique - this is clear evidence
of his exclusivity. The same was seen when Capablanca, Botvinnik, Fischer and
Karpov were young...' --- And so, in my second championship of the country I
not only consolidated my place in the Premier League, but won a bronze medal,
after which for the first time, but once and for all I was included in the
USSR team. Over a period of six months my international rating rose by 50
points and by the start of 1980 it had reached 2595. Not bad, but still a
whole 130 points behind Karpov...}) 1-0

[Event "?"]
[Site "?"]
[Date "????.??.??"]
[Round "?"]
[White "European 'Gold'"]
[Black "?"]
[Result "*"]
[Annotator "Garry Kasparov"]
[PlyCount "1"]
[EventDate "1984.??.??"]
[SourceDate "2009.12.07"]

{7th European Team Championship (Skara 19-27 January 1980): 1. USSR - 36½
out of 56; 2. Hungary - 29; 3. England - 28½; 4. Yugoslavia - 28; 5.
Bulgaria - 27½; 6. Czechoslovakia - 26; 7. Israel - 25; 8. Sweden - 23½.
Victory for the Soviet team was gained by Karpov, Tal (each 2/5), Petrosian 
(2½/5), Polugayevsky (4½/7), Geller, Balashov, Romanishin (each 4/6),
Vaganian (4½/6), reserves Yusupov (3½/4) and Kasparov (5½/6).} 1. -- {I
never again had such a triumphal year as 1980: I became a grandmaster and I
won four gold medals - three championship medals plus one for the successful
completion of my schooling! As the press commented, I 'began my course to the
"medal" year as a chubby, likeable lad, but approached the end as a lean youth
with narrow shoulders and a slim neck'. --- Three weeks after the championship
of the country, Yusupov and I made our debuts for the USSR team in the
European Team Championship, which took place in the small Swedish town of
Skara, close to Gothenburg. Playing in the same team as Karpov, Tal and
Petrosian was a great honour for a 16-year-old schoolboy. Although I was only
the second reserve, I felt on top of the world and I did my utmost to justify
the trust shown in me. Artur and I shared a room and together we scored more
points than any other pair of contestants... --- Nikitin: 'Here for the first
time Karpov saw Kasparov in action. They occupied diametrically opposite
positions in the team line-up and played diametrically opposite roles in its
performance. For various reasons, our three leaders at that time - Karpov,
Petrosian and Tal - performed extremely poorly: out of 15 games they scored 13
draws and 2 losses. And the convincing final victory of the Soviet team (by a
margin of 7½ points) was in fact not easily achieved. After four rounds we
were only half a point ahead of the Yugoslavs. I know how difficult it is to
take risks in such situations, the more so for a young debutant in such a
star-studded team. But in the 5th round match with Czechoslovakia, Garry
boldly sharpened the play - barely out of the opening, he sacrificed a pawn
for the initiative and won in brilliant style.'} *

[Event "38: European Team Championship, Skara"]
[Site "?"]
[Date "1980.01.24"]
[Round "5"]
[White "Kasparov, G."]
[Black "Pribyl, J."]
[Result "1-0"]
[ECO "D85"]
[Annotator "Garry Kasparov"]
[PlyCount "61"]
[EventDate "1980.??.??"]
[Source "Everyman Chess"]
[SourceDate "2012.11.28"]

1. d4 Nf6 2. c4 g6 3. Nc3 d5 4. cxd5 Nxd5 5. e4 Nxc3 6. bxc3 Bg7 7. Nf3 ({At
that time the standard move was} 7. Bc4 {(Game No.72), but under the influence
of a Korchnoi-Miles game (Vienna 1979) I began employing the innovatory set-up
with the development of the knight on f3, which had not yet accumulated any
theory. --- I have to admit that in my youth I considered the Grünfeld Defence
to be a not altogether correct opening: White creates a passed pawn in the
centre and advances it towards the queening square, at the same time building
up an attack on the king (for this reason the Queen's Indian with a2-a3 also
appealed to me). It was in this mood that I went along to the game.}) 7... b6
$6 {'The original cause of Black's defeat' (Nikitin).} ({The usual and most
critical reply is} 7... c5 {(Game No.48).}) ({The plan with ...b7-b6 usually
occurred after} 7... O-O 8. Be2 {. --- 'Now, however, White hampers the
opponent's attack on his pawn centre.' (Pribyl)}) 8. Bb5+ $1 c6 ({After} 8...
Bd7 9. Be2 {the move ...b7-b6 is made worthless.}) 9. Bc4 {(16) This was the
first game on this particular theme, and I spent some time considering where
it was best to retreat the bishop.} O-O 10. O-O {(3)} ({The exchange of the
light-square bishops could have been prevented by} 10. Qe2 {, but} b5 $5 11.
Bb3 b4 {seemed unclear to me, and, besides, White has quite good prospects
even without these pieces.}) 10... Ba6 {'Since ...c6-c5 is not possible, this
is Black's best plan' (Pribyl).} ({And indeed, if} 10... Bb7 {, then} 11. Qe2
c5 12. Bf4 {(g5) is good.}) 11. Bxa6 Nxa6 12. Qa4 {(3) Earlier I though that
this move was an inaccuracy;} ({and I recommended 'the simple} 12. Bg5 Qd7 13.
Qd2 {with a solid centre and a stable advantage'. However, the queen sortie is
probably no worse.}) 12... Qc8 13. Bg5 Qb7 ({Pribyl is correct not to hurry
with} 13... c5 {- after this there would not have followed} 14. d5 ({and not} 
14. Bxe7 Re8 15. Bd6 Rxe4 16. Rfe1 {(Stohl)} Rxe1+ 17. Rxe1 cxd4 18. cxd4 Nc7 {
(} 19. Rc1 Qe8 $1 {)}) ({but simply} 14. Rac1 $1) 14... Bxc3 15. Bxe7 Qe8 $1
16. Qxa6 Qxe7 {.}) 14. Rfe1 {(12) Developing and creating the threat of Bxe7.}
e6 ({At the board it was not easy to decide which was better - 14...e6 or} 
14... Rfe8 {. Apparently the two moves are roughly equivalent. Black prepares ...c6-c5, and the only visible defect of his position is the 'bad' knight at a6.
}) 15. Rab1 {(11) The prelude to a tempting pawn sacrifice.} ({Otherwise I
could have also chosen the more straightforward variation} 15. Rad1 c5 16. h4 {
, retaining the initiative with material equal.}) 15... c5 {The natural move,
but also practically forced: 16 c4 was threatened, with the idea of 16...c5 17
d5.} ({The preparatory} 15... h6 $6 {would have run into the unpleasant reply}
16. Be3 {, again hindering ...c6-c5 and threatening c3-c4. --- This is the
first critical position. Pribyl: 'At last Black has managed to attack the
centre. It appears that the advance d4-d5 is not possible on account of the
loss of the c3-pawn. However...'}) 16. d5 $5 {(10) After weighing up the
variations, I firmly resolved to give up the pawn. 'One of the candidatures
for Kasparov's chess coat of arms is a white d5-pawn, straining to advance
towards the queening square' (Nikitin).} ({If the preparatory move} 16. Red1 {
is made} -- ({, then} 16... h6 $6 17. Be3 $1 {is again unfavourable for Black})
({, but there is a risk of White conceding the initiative after} 16... cxd4 17.
cxd4 Rac8 {(Stohl)}) ({, as well as after} 16... f5 $5 17. Qc4 ({or} 17. exf5
Rxf5 18. Qc4 Re8) 17... cxd4 18. cxd4 Qc8 19. Qe2 fxe4 20. Qxe4 Qd7 21. Ne5 Qd5
{.})) ({Even so, it was possible to manage without any sacrifices - by trying
to provoke a further weakening of Black's kingside, exploiting the absence of
his knight from f6:} 16. h4 $5 h5 $6 ({or} 16... Rac8 17. h5 {, continuing to
fight for an advantage}) 17. Qb5 Rac8 18. a4 {, and Black is passively placed 
(without the inclusion of 16 h4 h5 this did not work because of 17...cxd4 18
cxd4 Bxd4! 19 Nxd4 Rc5).}) 16... Bxc3 {And why not?!} 17. Red1 exd5 ({A more
uncompromising reply than} 17... Bg7 {, expressing a readiness to 'return the
loot':} 18. dxe6 ({after} 18. d6 Nb4 $1 {it may be possible to give up the
exchange for the d-pawn}) 18... fxe6 19. Rd7 ({or} 19. Rd6 Nb4 $1 20. Rxe6 Qc8
21. Rd6 Qe8 $1 22. Qb3+ Qf7 {, and by accurate play Black achieves equality})
19... Qc8 20. Rbd1 c4 $1 {(Stohl).}) 18. exd5 {Now the play is more dynamic
than after 17...Bg7. White's obvious positional pluses - his strong passed
d5-pawn and the unfortunate knight at a6 - fully compensate for his material
deficit. But Black's defence is fairly simple, and all that is required of him
is precise, accurate play. True, this is the present-day view, whereas at the
time I rated my chances ultra-optimistically - the passed pawn in the centre
inspired me!} Bg7 $6 {It made sense first to attend to the knight.} ({After} 
18... Nb4 $2 {in 'Informator' I gave} 19. a3 {(?!)} ({whereas in fact it is
correct to play} 19. d6 Bg7 20. d7 {(Crouch)}) ({or} 19. Qb3 Bg7 20. a3 Na6 21.
d6) 19... Nxd5 20. Qc4 {, overlooking} Bd4 $1 21. Nxd4 cxd4 22. Rxd4 Ne7 {with
equality.}) ({In the event of} 18... Nb8 $6 {White promptly regains the pawn -}
19. Rdc1 ({or} 19. Qc4 Bg7 20. Qxc5) 19... Bg7 20. Rxc5 {.}) ({But} 18... Nc7
$1 {was correct} 19. -- ({, since my recommendation} 19. Be7 Rfe8 20. Qd7 {is
parried by} Rab8 ({or even} 20... Reb8 $5 21. Bg5 {(h4)} Bg7 $1 (21... Ne8 {is
also possible})) 21. Bh4 (21. Bd6 $2 Na6) ({or} 21. Bg5 h6 $1 22. Bxh6 $2 Red8
{is bad for White}) 21... Na6 22. Qb5 Nc7 $1 {.}) ({. The regaining of the
pawn is sounder -} 19. Qc4 Bg7 20. Qxc5 {, although after} Rac8 $1 {
(threatening the fork ...Ne6)} 21. Bh4 $1 Na6 22. Qe7 Rc7 23. Qe2 Rd7 {the
d-pawn is blocked and Black is on the verge of equalising.})) 19. d6 {(7)} f6 {
Black naturally wants to take control of the d8-square.} 20. d7 $3 {(13) 'A
bold piece sacrifice, giving White a dangerous attack' (Pribyl). 'The d7-pawn
cuts off half of the black army from the king's fortress' (Nikitin).} ({After} 
20. Bf4 {White undoubtedly has sufficient compensation for the pawn.} -- ({. If
} 20... Rae8 {(?), recommended by me in 'Informator', there follows} 21. Re1 $1
Rxe1+ 22. Rxe1 {with an invasion at e7.}) ({. It is also bad to play} 20... Nb8
$2 {(!? - Stohl)} 21. d7 $1 Rd8 ({or} 21... Nc6) 22. Rd6 $1 {and wins.}) ({.
After Pribyl's suggestion} 20... Rad8 21. Qc4+ Kh8 {'with very unclear play'
again;} ({and therefore it is better to play} 21... Rf7 $1 {(this also follows
after Stohl's move 21 Re1)} 22. Re1 $6 Nb4 {with the idea of ...Qd5}) 22. Re1
$1 {is promising (} Rd7 23. Re6 {).}) ({. But the most accurate was the
immediate} 20... Nb4 21. Qb3+ (21. d7 Rad8 {- Crouch}) 21... Rf7 $1 {,
surrounding 'with warmth and care' the audacious d-pawn. --- Therefore I
preferred a more energetic and interesting continuation, intuitively sensing
that the bishop sacrifice was quite correct and that it would be not at all
easy for the opponent to work things out at the board.})) 20... fxg5 $2 {The
critical but incorrect decision, and not 'the best chance', as Pribyl thought.}
({Apart from this, there were also other possibilities open to the two players:
} 20... h6 $2 {(a fatal weakening)} 21. Qc4+ $1 Kh7 22. Bf4 Rad8 23. Qe6 {,
and Black is in trouble:} Nc7 24. Bxc7 Qxc7 25. Rd6 Rf7 26. Rbd1 Kg8 27. Nh4 $1
Bf8 28. R6d5 Kg7 29. Nxg6 $1 Kxg6 30. R1d3 {and wins}) (20... Nb4 $6 {(this
was suggested after the game by Karpov)} 21. Qb3+ Kh8 {, and here there is the
flamboyant} 22. Ne5 $5 ({but a more obvious advantage is given by the prosaic} 
22. Bf4 $1 {(Stohl)} Rad8 23. Qe6) 22... fxe5 23. d8=Q Raxd8 24. Rxd8 Rxd8 25.
Bxd8 {.}) (20... Kh8 {leads after} 21. Qc4 $5 ({but allows White the
additional resource} 21. Bf4 {, which, however, is unclear because of} Rad8 $1
({the 'Informator'} 21... Nb4 $2 {is premature}) 22. Rd2 Nb4 {with
double-edged play}) 21... Rad8 {to variation 'd'.}) (20... Rad8 $1 21. Qc4+ (
21. Bf4 $2 Rf7) 21... Kh8 22. Ne5 $1 {. Offering a choice of either of two
pieces:} -- (22... fxe5 $2 23. Bxd8 Rxd8 24. Qe6 $1 -- ({, and now Black is
not saved by either} 24... Nc7 25. Qe7 Qa8 ({or} 25... Qb8 26. Rb3 $1 e4 27.
Re3 $1 ({but not} 27. Rd6 $2 Ne8 $1 28. Rc6 Qe5 {with equality})) 26. Rb3 $1 e4
27. Rd6 $1 {(} Ne8 28. Rc6 {and wins)}) ({, or Crouch's suggestion} 24... Qc7
25. Rd6 $1 Bf8 26. Qxe5+ Kg8 27. Qe6+ Kg7 28. Rbd1 $1 Bxd6 29. Rxd6 c4 30. Qe7+
Kg8 31. Rf6 $1 Qxd7 32. Rf8+) ({, or even} 24... Qb8 25. Rb3 $1 e4 $5 {
Crouch's improvement;} ({instead of my variation with} 25... c4 $2 26. Rh3) 26.
Ra3 $1 Nb4 (26... Nc7 27. Qxe4) 27. Re3 $1 {and Rxe4, winning})) (22... fxg5
23. Nf7+ Rxf7 24. Qxf7 Qc6 $1 25. -- ({; Pribyl rejected this because of} 25.
Re1 -- (25... Nc7 {(?)} 26. Re7 {'and wins' (probably, after} Qf6 27. Re8+ $1 {
)}) ({, not noticing the simple} 25... Qxd7 $1 26. Qxd7 Rxd7 27. Re8+ Bf8 28.
Rxf8+ Kg7 29. Re8 ({or} 29. Rc8 Nb4) 29... Nc7 {with two pawns for the
exchange and at least equal chances.})) (25. Rb3 $1 {is far stronger, for
example:} -- (25... Nc7 $6 26. Re3 h5 27. g4 $3 ({but not Crouch's variation} 
27. Re7 Qf6 28. Re8+ Nxe8 29. dxe8=Q+ Rxe8 30. Qxe8+ Kh7 {with a draw}) 27...
h4 (27... hxg4 $2 28. Rdd3 $1 {with the murderous threat of Rh3+}) ({or} 27...
Qa4 28. Rd6 $1 Qxg4+ (28... Qf4 29. Qe7 $1) 29. Kf1 Qf4 30. Qxg6 Rf8 ({if} 
30... h4 {, then} 31. Re8+ {is decisive}) 31. f3 $1 Qxe3 (31... Qc4+ 32. Kf2
Qh4+ 33. Kg2) 32. Qxh5+ Kg8 33. d8=Q $1 {(again the triumph of the d-pawn!)} g4
34. Rd3 Qc1+ 35. Kf2 Qb2+ 36. Rd2 Qc3 37. Qxg4 {and wins}) 28. h3 $1 Qf6 (28...
a5 29. Rde1 $1 {and Re7}) 29. Re8+ Nxe8 30. dxe8=Q+ Rxe8 31. Qxe8+ Kh7 32. Rd7
{, and Black's downfall is caused by the weakness of his kingside pawns.}) (
25... Qf6 26. Qe8+ Qf8 27. Re3 Nc7 28. Rde1 Nxe8 ({or} 28... Bf6 $1 29. Qxf8+
Rxf8 30. Re8 Kg7 31. Rc8 Nd5 $1 (31... Nb5 {is weaker:} 32. Rxf8 Kxf8 33. Re8+
Kf7 34. d8=Q Bxd8 35. Rxd8 {- Crouch}) 32. Rxf8 Kxf8 33. Rd1 $1 ({if now} 33.
Re8+ Kf7 34. d8=Q Bxd8 35. Rxd8 {, then} Ke6 $1) 33... Nc3 34. d8=Q+ Bxd8 35.
Rxd8+ Ke7 36. Rh8 a5 37. Rxh7+ Ke6 {(f6), and Black is nevertheless saved by
his queenside pawns}) 29. dxe8=Q Bf6 30. Qa4 $1 Qf7 31. Re8+ Rxe8 32. Rxe8+ Kg7
33. Ra8 a5 34. Qb3 {(e8). --- But my opponent was unable to resist the
immediate win of a piece, which made things easier for me: now White no longer
has to think about what to do with his bishop, and in addition his knight is
greatly activated.})))) 21. Qc4+ Kh8 22. Nxg5 Bf6 {The only move.} ({Black
would have lost at once after} 22... Nc7 $2 23. d8=Q) ({or} 22... Bd4 $2 23.
Rxd4 cxd4 24. Qxd4+ Kg8 25. Ne6 {.}) 23. Ne6 Nc7 {Again forced.} ({It was
clearly bad to play} 23... Qc6 $2 24. Nxf8 Rxf8 25. Qxa6 Bd4 26. Qxa7 $1) ({or
} 23... Rad8 $2 24. Rd6 $1 Rxd7 (24... Qb8 25. Rbd1) 25. Rxd7 Qxd7 26. Nxf8 {
etc.}) ({while if} 23... Nb4 $2 {there is the decisive} 24. Rd6 $1 {with the
threat of Nxf8 and Rxf6;} (24. Qf4 $6 Qb8 $1 25. Qf3 Bd4 $1 {with equality})
24... Nc6 (24... Be7 25. Re1 $1) 25. Nxf8 Rxf8 26. Re1 {(threatening Rxf6!)}
Kg7 27. Re8 $1 {and wins (Crouch).}) 24. Nxf8 Rxf8 25. Rd6 $1 {(8) A curious
moment.} ({At first sight I had a tempting opportunity to go into an endgame -
} 25. Qxc5 {(?)} Qxg2+ $1 26. Kxg2 bxc5 27. Rb7 Ne6 28. Rd6 {, but here Black
would have held on:} Nf4+ ({but} 28... Nd8 $5 {is even better:} 29. Rxa7 Bd4 {
and ...Kg7 with active counterplay}) 29. Kf1 (29. Kf3 Be7 $1) 29... Bd8 30.
Rxa7 {(previously I assessed this position in favour of White)} Kg7 $1 31. a4 (
31. Rc6 Rf5) 31... Kf7 32. Rc6 Nd3 33. a5 Ke7 {with equality. --- But after
the non-standard 'pitching' of the rook it suddenly transpires that White is
completely dominant. I didn't see all the consequences of this, but I sensed
that I was on the right path: the black pieces were just too uncoordinated. I
remember that later Pribyl and I spent a long time analysing the game, and we
were joined by Karpov, Vaganian and other players. They were perplexed as to
how I had won so dashingly. They all tried to find a defence for Black, but
every time they were rebuffed, which is not surprising: White's attacking
potential is very great.}) 25... Be7 {This allows a spectacular development of
the attack.} ({However, all the same Black is in a calamitous position:} 25...
Qb8 26. Rbd1 Qd8 27. Rc6 $1 Kg7 (27... Bg7 28. Qe4) ({or} 27... Bg5 28. Qc3+
Kg8 29. Qg3 {is no better}) 28. Qf4 $1 Nb5 29. Rc8 Qe7 30. Rxf8 Qxf8 31. d8=Q
Bxd8 32. Qxf8+ Kxf8 33. Rxd8+ Ke7 34. Ra8 {and 35 a4, winning}) (25... Bd8 26.
Rb3 $1 ({we only looked at} 26. h4 $5) 26... Qa6 27. Qc3+ Kg8 28. Qc2 $1 {(not
allowing the black queen to escape, and threatening Rxg6+)} Rf6 ({it is no
better to play} 28... Rf5 29. Re3 Qb5 30. a4 $1 Qb4 31. Re8+ Kg7 32. g3 c4 33.
Rd4) ({or} 28... Rf4 29. Rxg6+ $1 Kf8 30. Rd6 Qc4 31. Rc3 Qe4 32. Qd1 $1) 29.
Rxf6 Bxf6 30. Rf3 Qb5 {(there is nothing else)} 31. Rxf6 Qxd7 32. g3 {with a
technically won ending. --- Instead of this Pribyl made the most obvious move
- he attacked the annoying rook. But now White can advantageously regain the
material.}) 26. d8=Q $3 {(2) This move shocked Pribyl: the pride of White's
position - his passed d-pawn - sacrifices itself! 'A completely unexpected
idea of amazing beauty!' (Nikitin).} Bxd8 (26... Rxd8 27. Rxd8+ Bxd8 {loses to}
28. Qf7 ({or} 28. Rd1 $1 Qc8 29. Qf7 {(Nikitin)}) 28... Qd5 {(otherwise mate)}
29. Qxd5 Nxd5 30. Rd1 {.}) 27. Qc3+ $1 Kg8 28. Rd7 $1 Bf6 29. Qc4+ {'A very
important check;} ({if} 29. Qg3 $4 {there would have followed} Qe4 $1 {, when
Black wins.' (Pribyl)}) 29... Kh8 30. Qf4 $1 {The tempo play has concluded -
White wins the knight and remains with the exchange for a pawn and a solid
positional advantage. But here another opponent of mine cracked under the
pressure...} Qa6 $2 {'A mundane oversight, which loses immediately.} ({A pity,
since after} 30... Bg7 $1 {Black would have retained practical saving chances'
(Pribyl). Indeed, in the endgame after} 31. Qxc7 Qxc7 32. Rxc7 Bd4 {I would
have had to play} 33. Rf1 $1 ({but not} 33. Rxa7 $2 Rxf2 $1 34. Kh1 c4 35. Re1
Rf8 {and ...c4-c3}) 33... a6 (33... a5 34. a4 $1) 34. Rc6 $1 {(both attack,
and defence against ...c5-c4), in order nevertheless to convert my advantage
into a win. Black would lose quickly after} Rf6 ({while in the event of} 34...
Rb8 35. Re1) ({or} 34... b5 35. Rxa6 {the rest would have been a matter of
technique}) 35. Rxf6 Bxf6 36. Re1 {and Re6.}) 31. Qh6 {. Mate is unavoidable.
--- Times: 1.42-1.41.} (31. -- {The game with Pribyl, along with one of
Karpov's wins, was judged the best in the 29th volume of Informator. 'Every
chess player has his favourite game. For the moment this is mine', I said a
year later. 'Once I even called it "my evergreen" game. I like it for the fact
that it is so pretty, with a piece sacrifice! Such a sacrifice is sometimes
called controversial, but even now I am convinced that it is correct.' ---
When Yusupov and I were analysing the game in our hotel room, with a sad smile
Artur said something along the lines of 'I could not do things like that...'
He probably had in mind the degree of risk and the intensity of the play. But
if one recalls certain games by Yusupov, for example, from his matches with
Timman (1986), Karpov (1989) and Ivanchuk (1991), it is readily apparent that
Artur very much 'could'! --- In the end I achieved the best result in the team,
and we returned from Sweden with the gold medals. From the western press: 'It
is very probable that in the next few years Kasparov will become one of the
top grandmasters in the world. If not in the next cycle, then in the one after
it, this highly talented youth will take a direct part in the fight for the
world championship.' --- Immediately after my arrival in Baku I began a
training match with Tal, who was preparing for his Candidates match with
Polugayevsky. However, after two encounters (I was leading 1½-½) and a
series of blitz games, Mikhail Nekhemevich was obliged to fly urgently to Riga
- his uncle, to whom he was very close, had died. Tal lost his previous form,
but not his sense of humour - after losing his match to Polugayevsky in the
spring, he joked: 'Now I am Polutal!' (literally, 'Semi-Tal' - Translator's 
note). But I faced other examinations, the first being an international
tournament in my native Baku.}) 1-0

[Event "?"]
[Site "?"]
[Date "????.??.??"]
[Round "?"]
[White "Grandmaster"]
[Black "?"]
[Result "*"]
[Annotator "Garry Kasparov"]
[PlyCount "1"]
[EventDate "1984.??.??"]
[SourceDate "2009.12.07"]

{20th International Tournament of the USSR Central Chess Club (Baku, 29th
March - 18th April 1980): 1. Kasparov - 11½ out of 15; 2. Beliavsky - 11;
3-5. Gufeld, Mikhalchishin and K. Grigorian - 8½; 6-8. Csom, Torre and
Chiburdanidze - 8; 9-10. Lechtynsky and Magerramov - 7½; 11. Padevsky - 7;
12. Antoshin - 6½; 13-14. Vogt and Zaitsev - 6; 15. Martinovic - 4; 16. S.Garcia - 3½.} 1. -- {With foreign trips at a premium, the international
tournaments of the USSR Central Chess Club, held nearly every year, were a
good opportunity for a player to gain a higher title in his own country. In
the spring of 1980 the tournament was held for the only time in Baku and it
became a notable event in the sporting life of Azerbaijan - there had been no
international tournaments here since 1964. Of course, I awaited this test with
particular anxiety: I needed a second grandmaster norm, and I had no intention
of missing my chance. --- Eduard Gufeld, the trainer of the young lady world
champion Maya Chiburdanidze and also a participant in the Baku tournament,
wrote in the 64 magazine: 'The organisers were able to assemble a strong and
evenly-matched field. Among the 16 players who started the event, there were
11 (!) grandmasters from eight countries of the world, and the others -
Chiburdanidze, Kasparov, K.Grigorian, Lechtynsky and the rapidly progressing
Magerramov - fought on equal terms with their higher titled colleagues. The
numerous forecasts by the experts were unanimous: the main battle for victory
in the tournament should be between Kasparov and Beliavsky. These forecasts
were fully confirmed.'} (1. -- {Alexander Beliavsky was indeed one of the best
tournament players of that time. He won the gold medal of 1974 USSR champion 
(together with Tal), achieved impressive successes in Alicante 1978 (13 out of
13!) and Bogota 1979 (12½ out of 14), and a few days before his arrival in
Baku he scored a brilliant victory in Bucharest (12½ out of 15). And,
incidentally, he did not slow down after Baku - he won a tournament in Baden 
(with Spassky), the USSR Championship First League, then also the Premier
League (with Psakhis), and at the age of 27 he became champion of the country
for the second time! --- Therefore before the start I was not aiming in
particular for first place, but for the cherished 10 points out of 15. My
rating was already close to 2600, and everyone realised that it was time for
me to become a grandmaster. But the tournament exceeded all my expectations.
We were playing in the Sailors' Club, on the stage of a comfortable hall with
seating for about two hundred. The organisers created the atmosphere of a
genuine chess festival. I played freely and easily - it can indeed be an
advantage playing at home. How the people of Baku supported me!}) (1. -- {
Nikitin: 'All those days Garry was persistently shadowed by the anxious world
champion - among those included in the tournament was Karpov's trainer,
grandmaster Igor Zaitsev. The chess head of the USSR Sports Committee flew in
to assess "on site" the degree of support for Kasparov by the local
authorities. He took back bad news to Moscow: with the support for Garry
everything was in order.' --- The tone of my entire performance was set by an
interesting first round game with the Hungarian grandmaster Istvan Csom, a
participant in one of the 1976 Interzonal Tournaments (view the following game)
.}) *

[Event "39: USSR Central Chess Club, Baku"]
[Site "?"]
[Date "1980.03.30"]
[Round "1"]
[White "Kasparov, G."]
[Black "Csom, I."]
[Result "1-0"]
[ECO "E42"]
[Annotator "Garry Kasparov"]
[PlyCount "57"]
[EventDate "1980.??.??"]
[Source "Everyman Chess"]
[SourceDate "2012.11.28"]

1. d4 Nf6 2. c4 e6 3. Nc3 ({In those years I regularly played either} 3. Nf3 b6
4. a3) ({or, as in the given instance,} 3. Nc3 Bb4 4. e3 {and Nge2 - this
variation attracted my attention after the match in Baguio (1978).}) 3... Bb4
4. e3 c5 ({Or} 4... O-O 5. Nge2 ({later I also played} 5. Bd3) 5... d5 6. a3
Be7 (6... Bd6 $1 {is stronger, as Kurajica played against me (Banja Luka 1979)
and I myself played against Epishin (Moscow 2004)}) 7. cxd5 exd5 (7... Nxd5 $5
8. g3 Nxc3 9. Nxc3 c5 {, Kasparov-Tal, 1st match game, Baku 1980}) 8. g3 a5 (
8... c6 9. Bg2 Na6 ({or} 9... Bd6 {was also tried against me})) 9. Bg2 Re8 10.
O-O c6 11. h3 $5 {(a new plan of mine, instead of the traditional f2-f3)} Bd6
12. g4 h6 13. f4 Na6 14. Ng3 b5 15. Qf3 b4 16. axb4 axb4 17. Nce2 Ne4 18. Nxe4
dxe4 19. Qf2 {with the initiative on the kingside (Kasparov-Lerner, 47th USSR
Championship, Minsk 1979).}) 5. Nge2 {Rubinstein's old variation, revived by
Korchnoi.} ({Later I also tried both} 5. a3) ({and} 5. Bd3 {.}) 5... cxd4 ({I
would also have been satisfied with} 5... d5 6. a3 Bxc3+ 7. Nxc3 cxd4 8. exd4
dxc4 9. Bxc4 Nc6 10. Be3 O-O 11. O-O b6 {(Korchnoi-Karpov, 5th match game,
Baguio 1978)} 12. Qf3 $1 Bb7 13. Bd3 Rc8 14. Rad1 Rc7 15. Qh3 Ne7 16. Bg5 {
(Kasparov-Psakhis, 6th match game, Murcia 1990).}) ({But the unexpected
continuation} 5... b6 6. a3 Ba5 {proved quite acceptable for Black 
(Kasparov-Romanishin, 47th USSR Championship, Minsk 1979).}) 6. exd4 O-O {A
surprise at the very start! Csom made a move which had an indifferent
reputation.} ({The usual line is} 6... d5 7. c5 Ne4 8. Bd2 Nxd2 9. Qxd2 a5 $1 (
{the old} 9... b6 $6 {is weaker:} 10. a3 Bxc3 11. Nxc3 bxc5 12. dxc5 {
Reshevsky-Najdorf, Dallas 1957; Kasparov-Tal, Brussels (blitz) 1987}) 10. a3
Bxc3 11. Nxc3 Bd7 (11... a4 $5) 12. Bd3 a4 {with a solid position 
(Korchnoi-Karpov, 3rd match game, Baguio 1978).}) 7. a3 Be7 {Another
revelation: it was thought that this was bad for Black.} ({Magerramov and I
looked at} 7... Bxc3+ 8. Nxc3 d5 9. c5 Ne4 10. Nxe4 ({not} 10. Qc2 Nc6 11. Be3
e5 $1) 10... dxe4 11. Bf4 Nc6 12. Bd6 {etc., judging this to be the lesser
evil.}) 8. d5 {(5) The critical continuation;} ({otherwise Black may get away
with his 'sins' (6...0-0 and 7...Be7) after, say,} 8. g3 d5 ({during the game
I also did not like} 8... Qc7 $5 {.})) ({But nowadays White is often satisfied
with a small advantage -} 8. Nf4 d5 9. cxd5 Nxd5 10. Ncxd5 $1 (10. Nfxd5 exd5 {
with equality, Capablanca-Keres, AVRO Tournament 1938}) 10... exd5 11. Bd3 Nc6
12. O-O {, and Black has some problems equalising (Timman-Anand, Wijk aan Zee
2000; Kramnik-Leko, 9th match game, Budapest (rapid) 2001).}) 8... exd5 9. cxd5
Re8 {Previously this half-forgotten move had occurred only three times, and
those were in the 1960s.} ({There was more experience with another problematic
reply -} 9... Bc5 {, after which the most critical is} 10. Na4 {(Evans-König,
Hastings 1949/50),} ({although White has also played} 10. Nd4 {(Botvinnik-Averbakh, 2nd match game, Moscow 1956)}) ({or} 10. b4 Bb6 11. Na4 {
(Miles-Adorjan, Wijk aan Zee 1984; Torre-Karpov, London 1984).})) 10. g3 {(5)}
({A year later I made a new try -} 10. Be3 -- ({, and after} 10... d6 11. h3 (
11. Ng3 $5 Ng4 12. Bd4 {deserves consideration}) 11... Nbd7 12. Ng3 Bf8 13. Be2
Rxe3 $6 14. fxe3 g6 15. O-O Qe7 16. Qd4 {I achieved an obvious advantage,
although I was unable to convert the extra exchange (Kasparov-Andersson,
Moscow 1981).}) ({. But soon it transpired that} 10... Ng4 $1 11. Bd4 Nh6 $1 {
is stronger, with good play - the threat of ...Nf5 practically forces White to
go in for extreme measures:} 12. g4 ({or} 12. Ng3 Bxa3+ 13. Be2 Bxb2 {
(Ree-Ligterink, Wijk aan Zee 1984)}) 12... d6 13. h3 f5 $1 {(Groszpeter-Adorjan
Groszpeter-Adorjan, Hungary 1983).})) ({On the other hand, the gambit} 10. d6
$5 Bf8 11. g3 {, hindering the development of the opponent's queenside, gives
White a promising position:} Re6 ({or} 11... Qb6 12. Bg2 Bxd6 13. Be3 {
(Korchnoi-Miles, Wijk aan Zee 1984)}) 12. Bg2 (12. Bf4 $5 Nh5 13. Be3 {,
Korchnoi-Kindermann, Beer Sheva 1984}) 12... Rxd6 13. Qc2 {(Gligoric-Karpov,
Bugojno 1980). --- That is how White should fight for an advantage, but, on
encountering this variation for the first time, I restricted myself to the
developing move 10 g3.}) 10... Bc5 ({There is no sense in Black playing} 10...
d6 {, leaving himself with a passive dark-square bishop.}) 11. Bg2 {Here Csom,
who up till then had played quickly, stopped to think. Strangely enough, the
bishop move was a novelty!} ({The 'Encyclopaedia of Chess Openings' of that
time cited the game Polugayevsky-Kholmov, (29th USSR Championship, Baku 1961),
where after} 11. Na4 -- (11... Bf8 12. Bg2 d6 13. O-O {White gained slightly
the better position.}) ({. But} 11... d6 $5 {is far more effective (with the
idea of} 12. Nxc5 dxc5 13. Bg2 Qa5+ {)}) ({, or else} 11... b6 $5 {, when} 12.
Nxc5 $6 ({and so there remains only} 12. Bg2 Ba6 13. Bf3 {, but here the
bishop is badly placed, and Black achieves a comfortable game by} Bf8 14. O-O
d6 {and ...Nbd7-e5. It was probably something along these lines that my
opponent had in mind}) 12... bxc5 13. Bg2 Ba6 14. Be3 (14. Bf3 $2 d6 {and ...Nbd7-e5}) 14... Ng4 {is unfavourable for White.})) 11... d6 {Realising that a
direct attack on f2 does not bring any benefit, Csom continues to develop.} ({
Indeed, if} 11... Ng4 $6 12. O-O {Black has a depressing position after} Qf6 $2
({while after} 12... Qb6 {White can choose between a tempting pawn sacrifice -}
13. Ne4 Rxe4 14. Bxe4 Nxf2 15. Rxf2 Bxf2+ 16. Kg2 {with a wealth of
possibilities (} d6 17. Bxh7+ $1 {) and simple defence - 13 Qe1 and h2-h3}) 13.
Nf4 Nxf2 14. Rxf2 Bxf2+ 15. Kxf2 g5 16. Ne4 Qb6+ 17. Be3 Qxb2+ 18. Kg1 {.}) 12.
h3 {(8) An important move.} ({The exchange of the bishop on c8 for the knight
on e2 (} 12. O-O Bg4 {) should not be allowed. The knight has a more promising
future than may be apparent at first sight.}) 12... Bf5 {Potentially this
gives me tempi for developing a pawn offensive on the kingside (White's only
active plan).} (12... a6 $1 {is better:} 13. O-O Nbd7 14. Nd4 Ne5 15. -- (15.
Nce2 Bd7 {with excellent play (Chandler-Andersson, Olympiad, Malta 1980).}) (
15. b4 $2 Bxd4 16. Qxd4 Bxh3 $1 {.}) ({. Also, nothing is promised by} 15. g4
h6 {(} 16. g5 $6 hxg5 17. Bxg5 Bxd4 18. Qxd4 Bxh3 $1 {)}) ({, or} 15. Nf3 Nxf3+
16. Qxf3 h6 {.} (16... --))) 13. O-O Nbd7 {Black's position looks completely
safe, and Csom continues playing routinely, making the most natural developing
moves.} ({Apparently he should have preferred} 13... Ne4 $5 {, allowing the
exchange of his bishop at c5 after} 14. Na4 Nd7 {, but obtaining lively piece
play (Zilberman-Zhidkov, Moscow 1981). 13...Nbd7 can be called the initial
cause of Black's subsequent difficulties, although objectively things are not
yet so bad.}) 14. g4 $1 {(9) The advance of the kingside pawns is fully
justified - it seriously cramps the black knights (which in any case have
restricted manoeuvring possibilities), and in addition the bishop on c5 will
be unable to take part in the forthcoming battle. For me g3-g4 was an obvious
move, but on Csom it had an oppressive effect. From this point on the
grandmaster began increasingly often thinking for a long time over his moves.
White's plan of attack came as such a surprise to him that he was unable to do
anything to oppose it.} Be4 (14... Bg6 {was correct. In 'Informator' and 'The
Test of Time' I judged the variation} 15. Ng3 Ne5 ({in addition, Black has the
move} 15... h6 {and then, for example,} 16. Kh2 ({but not} 16. Kh1 $2 Ne5 17.
f4 Nexg4 $1 18. hxg4 Nh5 $1) 16... Bb6 17. f4 Rc8 18. f5 Bh7 19. Bf4 Ne5 20.
Nce4 {with unclear play, although White's position appeals more}) 16. g5 Nfd7
17. Nce4 {to be in my favour, but analysis shows that after} Qb6 {the position
is one of dynamic balance (the direct} 18. h4 {is parried by} Bxe4 19. Nxe4 f5
$1 {).}) 15. Ng3 Bxg2 16. Kxg2 {The situation has changed sharply to White's
advantage: the exchange of bishops has benefitted him, facilitating his
offensive on the kingside.} Nf8 $6 {Avoiding the cramping g4-g5 and not
obtaining anything in return - all the same the knight does not reach g6.} (
16... h6 {was better, although after} 17. f4 $1 {White has unpleasant pressure:
} a5 (17... Nh7 $6 18. b4 Bb6 19. Nf5) ({or} 17... Rc8 18. h4 {and g4-g5 (} h5
19. g5 Ng4 20. Nxh5 Ne3+ 21. Bxe3 {does not give Black full compensation for
the pawn)}) 18. g5 (18. h4 b5 $5) 18... hxg5 19. fxg5 Nh7 20. Nge4 Ne5 21. h4 {
and h4-h5.}) 17. g5 N6d7 18. h4 {Black now faces difficult problems.} (18. b4
Bb6 19. f4 {was also quite good, and if} Ng6 {, then} 20. Nce4 Qc7 21. f5 {.})
18... Ne5 ({Previously I thought that the last opportunity to gain counterplay
was} 18... Rc8 {'followed by ...Bb6 and ...Nc5, not conceding the e4-square
without a fight'. However, here too after} 19. h5 {White has a clear advantage
(if} Bb6 $6 {, then} 20. h6 {,} (20. f4) ({and} 20. Nf5 {are all strong).}))
19. h5 $1 {The black pieces are greatly restricted, and now White's threats
clearly take shape - Nce4 and then h5-h6 or b2-b3 and f2-f4. After half an
hour's thought Csom realised that further passivity would lead to a rapid
defeat, and he decided to undermine my pawn pair.} f6 20. Nce4 $1 {(13) White
has an overwhelming advantage in force on the decisive part of the battlefield.
Many of those watching the game were surprised at how quickly, without making
any obvious mistakes, Csom found himself in a lost position: up to the 14th
move he had nothing to be concerned about, but after the 20th he could already
have resigned with a clear conscience! This is how my forcing style took shape.
..} fxg5 {The lesser evil.} (20... Nfd7 {is very strongly met by both} 21. b4 (
{and} 21. f4 Nc4 ({or} 21... Nf7 22. g6) 22. Qd3 b5 23. b3 {.})) 21. Bxg5 Qb6
22. h6 Nf7 ({(or} 22... gxh6 23. Bxh6 Nfd7 24. b4 $1 Bd4 25. Nf5 $1 {, and if}
Bxa1 {, then} 26. f4 {etc.)}) 23. hxg7 Nd7 {Defending against the immediate
threats, but Black is helpless against the transfer of White's army to the
kingside.} 24. Nf6+ {(14)} Nxf6 25. Bxf6 {Among other things, 26 b4 is
threatened, winning the ill-starred bishop.} Qb5 26. Rh1 {(5)} Bb6 27. Qf3 $1 {
White simply prepares to double rooks on the h-file.} Ne5 ({Black would also
have lost ignominiously after} 27... h6 28. Rxh6 $1 Nxh6 29. Rh1) ({or} 27...
Bd8 28. Bxd8 Raxd8 29. Rxh7 $1 {.}) 28. Nf5 $1 {(the e2-knight also has its
say, creating the threat of Nh6 mate)} Nf7 29. Rxh7 $1 {. Times: 1.38-2.27.} (
29. -- {In the 2nd round I employed the Modern Benoni against Karen Grigorian
and obtained a promising position. However, in the opponent's severe
time-trouble I went wrong, and after my impulsive 28th move Grigorian could
have won immediately. In this amazing position only one move would win,
whereas all the others would lose! With his flag hanging, White missed his
chance and two moves later he resigned. Later the classic phrase 'lucky like
the first prize-winner' involuntarily came to mind. --- So, 2 out of 2. But in
my 3rd round game with my main rival, Beliavsky, I didn't know what to do with
White, and I felt very uncertain. I didn't want to play either a 'Spanish', or
a Queen's Gambit, and in the end I employed some fuzzy hybrid of the English
and Catalan Openings, allowing Black to gain a draw with ease (1 c4 e6 2 Nf3
d5 3 g3 dxc4 4 Bg2 Nd7! 5 Qa4 a6 6 Qxc4 b5 7 Qc6 Rb8 8 Qc2 Bb7 etc.). What
told was my lack of experience: the ability to beat players of the class of
Beliavsky was to come later. --- In the 4th round with Black I shared the
point with Gufeld (he played openly for a draw). And in the 5th round my
opponent was the well-known Filipino grandmaster Eugenio Torre, a friend of
Fischer, the winner of a four-player tournament in Manila 1976 (where he
sensationally defeated Karpov), and a participant in several Interzonal
tournaments - in 1982 he even qualified for the Candidates matches.}) 1-0

[Event "40: USSR Central Chess Club, Baku"]
[Site "?"]
[Date "1980.04.04"]
[Round "5"]
[White "Kasparov, G."]
[Black "Torre, E."]
[Result "1-0"]
[ECO "A44"]
[Annotator "Garry Kasparov"]
[PlyCount "113"]
[EventDate "1980.??.??"]
[Source "Everyman Chess"]
[SourceDate "2012.11.28"]

{For some valid reason Torre flew into Baku with a delay of two rounds and his
postponed games were played later on the days for adjournments. The
grandmaster began splendidly - before the game with me he had 2½ out of 3
and one game in reserve (which in the end he also won). Therefore our game was
of particular competitive significance. Torre played a slow version of the
Benoni and ended up in a cramped position (} 1. d4 c5 2. d5 d6 3. c4 e5 4. e4
Be7 5. Nf3 Bg4 6. Nbd2 Na6 7. Be2 Nf6 8. a3 {etc.). White gradually increased
his spatial advantage, and after the first time control the following curious
position was reached.} O-O 9. O-O g6 10. Ne1 Bd7 11. Nd3 Ne8 12. b4 Rc8 13. Bb2
Bf6 14. Qb3 b6 15. Kh1 Bg7 16. f4 Bh6 17. Rf2 f6 18. b5 Nb8 19. Bf1 Rc7 20. g3
Bc8 21. Bg2 Rcf7 22. a4 Ng7 23. Bc3 Nh5 24. Qd1 Ng7 25. a5 Ne8 26. Qe2 Bg7 27.
axb6 axb6 28. f5 Bh6 29. h4 Rg7 30. Nf1 Rff7 31. Ra8 Bb7 32. Ra2 Bc8 33. Bh3
Ra7 34. Qf3 Rgb7 35. Nh2 Qc7 36. Kg2 Bg7 37. Bg4 gxf5 38. Bxf5 Bxf5 39. Qxf5
Qd7 40. h5 Qxf5 41. exf5 {. Almost without thinking, Torre played} Bh6 {.} ({
Instead of this he could have tried to set up a fortress with} 41... h6 {- the
pawn palisade looks impassable, but White carries out the following plan (I
will omit Black's moves: they do not change the position): Ng4, Rfb2, Bd2 
(here the black king goes to h7), Kf3-e4, Nd3-e1-f3-h4-g6, the king moves
across to b3 and all the rooks are exchanged, then the king returns to the
centre and after Ng6-e7-c6 (the black knight is at d7), Ng4-h2, g3-g4,
Nh2-f3-h4-g6 White places his knights at c8 and e6 and his king at d3, after
which the sacrifice on b6 is decisive (Nxb6 Nxb6, Ba5 Nd7, b5-b6-b7, Ne6-d8-c6
and Kd3-a7). Black has no way of opposing this multi-move plan.}) 42. Ng4 {
Here the game was adjourned, and Torre sealed his next move. The analysis of
the position, carried out together with Nikitin and Shakarov, proved not only
very interesting, but also uncommonly protracted: the game was resumed only
after the 11th round - it was moved from 7th April (Torre was playing a
postponed game) to the 13th, i.e. to my birthday!} (42. Ng4 {It is obvious
that Black is not able to prevent the white pawn from reaching h6, after which
the knight on e8 will be crippled.} {At first the winning plan seemed simple
after both} Bg5 {(cf. the game continuation)} ({and} 42... Kg7 43. Nxh6 Kxh6
44. Bd2+ Kg7 ({of course, not} 44... Kxh5 $2 45. Kh3 {with mate}) 45. h6+ Kf7
46. Bc3 {(c1), when the knight is transferred to e4, and after Kf3 and Rg2 the
advance of the g-pawn decides the outcome.} ({However, soon it transpired that
} 46. Bc1 {allows Black counterplay:} Nd7 47. Rfc2 $1 ({defending the c4-pawn:
} 47. Rfe2 $6 e4 48. Nf2 {is inaccurate on account of} Ne5 ({or} 48... e3 {and
...Ne5})) 47... e4 48. Nf2 e3 49. Ng4 {(in order to answer 49...Ne5 with 50
Nxe3)} e2 $5 {a desperate lunge.} 50. Rxe2 {(?)} ({it was only much later that
I discovered} 50. Kf2 $1 Ne5 51. Nxe5+ dxe5 52. Kxe2 Nd6 53. g4 Rxa2 (53... Re7
54. Be3) 54. Rxa2 Nxc4 55. Ra8 Ke7 56. g5 fxg5 57. Kd3 {and wins}) 50... Ne5
51. Ne3 Nd3 {, wreaking havoc in the white ranks.}) 46... -- {But at the time
we settled on 46 Bc3 - although the exchange of the bishop for the knight on
e5 is undesirable (the knight on e8 returns to life), even so it is useful to
keep the dangerous knight under fire.} ({. It became obvious that Black cannot
delay the advance of the e5-pawn:} 46... Nd7 47. Rfe2 {(threatening Nf2-e4,
Kf3, Rg2 and g3-g4-g5)} e4 48. Nf2 Ne5 49. Bxe5 fxe5 50. Nxe4 Ke7 51. Ra6 $1
Rxa6 52. bxa6 Ra7 53. Ra2 {with a straightforward win (} Nc7 54. g4 Rxa6 55.
Rxa6 Nxa6 56. g5 {).}) ({. The path for White is far more tortuous after} 46...
e4 $1 47. Nf4 Nd7 {(?!)} 48. Ne6 Ke7 {.} 49. -- ({. Now he fails to achieve
his goal with} 49. Rfe2 Ne5 50. Rxa7 Rxa7 51. Rxe4 Ra3 52. Bxe5 dxe5 53. Rg4
Ra2+ 54. Kh3 Ra1 {.}) ({. White can consolidate his advantage only with the
far from obvious manoeuvre} 49. Rae2 $1 {, conceding the a-file, but retaining
both rooks. For example:} -- (49... Ra3 50. Rxe4 $1 Rxc3 ({or} 50... Ne5 51.
Bxe5 dxe5 52. Rg4 Kd6 (52... Rba7 53. Rg8 Rc3 54. Rh8 Raa3 55. d6+ Nxd6 56.
Rxh7+ Nf7 57. Rg7 {is no better}) 53. Rg8 Re7 54. Ng7 $1 Kd7 55. Nxe8 Rxe8 56.
Rg7+ Re7 57. d6 $1 Rxg7 58. hxg7 Ra8 59. Kf3 Rg8 60. Ra2 Kxd6 61. Ra7 h5 62.
Rf7 $1 ({but not} 62. Ke4 h4 63. gxh4 $2 Rxg7 $1 {with a draw})) 51. Nxc5+ Ne5
52. Nxb7 Ra3 53. c5 $1 dxc5 (53... bxc5 54. b6) 54. d6+ Nxd6 55. Rxe5+ fxe5 56.
f6+ {.}) (49... Ra4 50. Rxe4 Ne5 {, and here the march of the g-pawn proves
decisive -} 51. g4 $1 Rxc4 ({a little ruse -} 51... Ra3 {- also does not help
Black.} 52. g5 $1 ({now after} 52. Bxe5 dxe5 {the white rook's path to g8 is
blocked}) 52... Rxc3 {(breaks through the defence)} (52... fxg5 {is also bad
because of} 53. Rxe5 $1 Rxc3 (53... dxe5 54. Bxe5 Raa7 55. f6+ Kf7 56. Nxg5+
Kg6 57. f7) 54. f6+ $1 Nxf6 55. Rxg5 Ne8 56. Rg7+) 53. g6 Rb8 (53... Nc7 54.
Nd8 $1) 54. Ra2 {, and, despite his extra piece, Black is helpless}) 52. Rxc4
Nxc4 53. g5 Ne3+ 54. Kg3 Nxd5 55. g6 {.}))) ({. All that then seemed to be
needed was to polish up some sidelines, and to go long to the resumption for a
certain point. But for this I had to wait a whole week. 'Resuming' the game
mentally, I suddenly thought: 'But what if Black should disrupt the
coordination of the white pieces after} 46... e4 47. Nf4 {by advancing his
doomed pawn -} e3 {?' After} 48. Rfe2 {(48 Rfb2!?)} Nd7 49. Ne6 ({at the time
we underestimated} 49. Kf3 $5 Ke7 ({or} 49... Ne5+ 50. Bxe5 dxe5 51. Ng2 {and
Nxe3 with good winning chances}) 50. Ng2) 49... Ke7 {White has no favourable
regrouping, whereas Black carries out his plan. We promptly got down to work,
but everywhere a defence for Black was found. After analysing the variation}
50. Ra6 Rxa6 51. bxa6 Ra7 52. Rxe3 ({if} 52. Ra2 Ne5 53. Ra4 {Black is saved by
} e2 $1 54. Kf2 Ng4+ 55. Kf3 Nxh6 56. g4 Nf7 57. Kxe2 Ne5 58. Bxe5 dxe5) 52...
Ne5 53. Bxe5 dxe5 54. Ra3 Nd6 55. Ra4 Nxf5 {, I began inclining towards the
view that the adjourned position was probably drawn. There remained the hope
that Torre had either sealed 42...Bg5, or he would not find 47...e3!. --- But
it is all very well hoping, and I still had an idea that White's play could be
improved somewhere (seeing as there was ample time for analysis). And, indeed,
soon it transpired that in the last variation after 55...Nxf5 White has the
excellent move} 56. Nc7 $1 {. --- We again sat down at the board, not yet
imagining where this new path would lead us. Black has three sensible replies
- 56...Nd6, 56...Kd7, 56...Nd4 - and each of them requires a thorough
examination. Many hours of analysis, during which we had to make our way
through a maze of intricate variations, gave the following results:} -- (56...
Nd6 57. Nb5 Ra8 (57... Nxb5 58. cxb5 f5 59. g4 $1) 58. Nxd6 Kxd6 59. Kf3 ({
smoother than} 59. g4 e4 $5 60. Kg3 $1 Ke5 61. a7 $1 {and wins}) 59... f5 ({or
} 59... Kc7 60. Ke4 b5 61. cxb5 Kb6 62. Kf5 Kxb5 63. Ra1 c4 64. d6) 60. g4 e4+
61. Kf4 fxg4 62. Kxg4 ({apart from 62 Kxg4, both} 62. Ra2 {(a1)}) ({and} 62.
Kxe4 g3 (62... Kc7 63. Ra3 $1) 63. Kf3 Kc7 64. Ra1 {etc. are also decisive})
62... Kc7 (62... Ke5 63. a7 $1 Kd4 64. d6 e3 65. Kf3 $1 Kd3 66. Ra3+ Kd2 67.
Rxe3 Rf8+ 68. Ke4 $1 Re8+ 69. Kd5 {, and the pawns are stronger than the rook})
63. a7 $1 b5 64. cxb5 Kb6 65. d6 Kxb5 (65... e3 66. d7 e2 67. Re4) 66. Rxe4
Rxa7 ({or} 66... Kc6 67. Re7) 67. Re7 Ra6 (67... Ra1 68. Rxh7 Kc6 69. d7) 68.
d7 Rd6 69. Rxh7 c4 70. Re7 c3 71. h7 c2 72. h8=Q c1=Q 73. Qb8+ {. This is the
longest variation, although it is not obligatory.}) (56... Kd7 57. Nb5 Ra8 58.
a7 Nd4 (58... Nxh6 59. Ra6) ({or} 58... Nd6 59. Nxd6 Kxd6 60. Kf3 {is also
hopeless for Black}) 59. Nc3 $1 ({the line given by me in 'The Test of Time'
also wins:} 59. Ra6 Nxb5 60. cxb5 f5 61. Kf3 {etc.}) 59... Nf5 60. Ne4 Nxh6 (
60... Ke7 61. Kf3 Nxh6 62. d6+ $1) 61. Nxf6+ Kc7 62. Nxh7 Kb7 63. d6 Rxa7 64.
Rxa7+ Kxa7 65. d7 Nf7 66. Nf8 {and wins}) (56... Nd4 57. Nb5 Ra8 {. The most
resilient.} 58. d6+ $6 ({later the winning} 58. Nc3 $1 Nf5 ({or} 58... Ra7 59.
g4) 59. a7 {was found}) 58... Kd7 59. Nc7 Ra7 60. Nd5 Kxd6 $1 61. Nxb6 Kc6 62.
Nc8 Ra8 63. Ne7+ {, and here} Kb6 $1 ({but in my analysis I overlooked this,
restricting myself to the cooperative variation} 63... Kd6 {(?)} 64. Nd5 Ra7
65. Nxf6 Nf5 66. Nxh7 Nxh6 67. Nf6 Nf5 68. Ne4+ Kc6 69. Ra5 {and the résumé:
'The white knight's acrobatic pirouettes make a strong impression'}) 64. Nd5+
Ka7 65. Nxf6 Rb8 $1 {gives Black real saving chances. --- So I went along to
the resumption confident now of victory, and eager that 42...Kg7 should have
been sealed, in order to demonstrate the beauty of our deep analysis. But alas.
..})))) 42... Bg5 $6 43. h6 Re7 (43... e4 44. Nf4 Bxf4 (44... Nd7 45. Ne6) 45.
gxf4 Nd7 46. Rfe2 {was no better for Black - then White picks up the e4-pawn,
plays his king to d3 and his knight to h5, moves his rook from a2 to e2 and
wins either by Nh5-g7, or by doubling rooks on the e-file.}) 44. Rfe2 Kf7 45.
Ndf2 Bc1 46. Ne4 Red7 47. Kf3 ({The exchange of all the rooks would also have
been decisive:} 47. Rxa7 Rxa7 48. Re1 Ra2+ 49. Kf3 Bg5 (49... Rc2 50. Re2) 50.
Ra1 Rxa1 51. Bxa1 Bc1 52. Ke2 Nd7 53. Kd1 Ba3 (53... Bg5 54. Bb2 {followed by
Ke2-f3 and at a convenient moment Nxg5}) 54. Bc3 Bb4 55. Bb2 {- the black
bishop is shut out of the game, and White without hindrance prepares the
g3-g4-g5 breakthrough (from g4 the knight goes to h5, the king to f3, the
bishop to c1, and so on). But I decided to remove my king from a possible
check on a2 and to set a pretty trap, which I had noticed during the
resumption.}) 47... Ke7 (47... Ba3 {was more resilient, after which the
invasion on the a-file would have won -} 48. Ra1 Bb4 49. Rea2 Ra5 $6 50. Rxa5
bxa5 51. Bxb4 axb4 52. b6 $1 Ke7 53. Ra7 {, when Black is almost stalemated,
for example:} b3 54. Ngf2 b2 55. Nc3 Kd8 56. Nfe4 Kc8 ({or} 56... Ke7 57. Ke3 {
followed by Kd3-c2 etc.}) 57. g4 $1 {and g4-g5.}) 48. Rxa7 Rxa7 49. Re1 Bg5 50.
Nxg5 fxg5 51. Nxe5 $1 dxe5 ({Or} 51... Ra3 52. Nc6+ Kf8 53. Re3 Nxc6 (53... g4+
54. Kf4) 54. Bg7+ Nxg7 55. hxg7+ Kxg7 56. bxc6 {.}) 52. Bxe5 Nd6 ({There was
no good defence against the threatened discovered check (} 52... Ra3+ 53. Kg4
Nd7 54. Bb2+ {), but now the white pawns have the final say.}) 53. f6+ Kd7 54.
Bxd6 Kxd6 55. Re6+ Kc7 56. f7 Ra1 57. Ke2 {. After adjourning this game, the
next day I drew with Magerramov (who, incidentally, in the end achieved the
international master norm). After six rounds, taking account of adjourned and
postponed games, I was on +3, along with Beliavsky and Torre, while
Mikhalchishin had +2. However, the latter two soon dropped out of the battle
for the lead: Mikhalchishin drew all his remaining games, while, even before
the day that our game was resumed, Torre suffered three defeats.} 1-0

[Event "41: USSR Central Chess Club, Baku"]
[Site "?"]
[Date "1980.04.06"]
[Round "7"]
[White "Kasparov, G."]
[Black "Zaitsev, I."]
[Result "1-0"]
[ECO "D58"]
[Annotator "Garry Kasparov"]
[PlyCount "60"]
[EventDate "1980.??.??"]
[Source "Everyman Chess"]
[SourceDate "2012.11.28"]

{But before the 7th round the competitive intrigue was still very sharp, and a
timely win over Igor Zaitsev, who had begun the tournament with six draws,
helped me to burst half a step ahead.} 1. d4 d5 2. c4 e6 3. Nc3 Nf6 4. Bg5 Be7
5. e3 O-O 6. Nf3 h6 7. Bh4 (7. Bxf6 {- Game Nos. 54, 92.}) 7... b6 8. Qc2 {(2)}
({At that time searches for an advantage against the
Tartakower-Makogonov-Bondarevsky Variation were mainly associated with} 8. Qb3
{(Game No.20). But, as also in other Queen's Gambit set-ups, here I far
preferred the double-edged plan with castling on opposite sides.}) 8... Bb7 9.
Bxf6 Bxf6 10. cxd5 exd5 11. O-O-O c5 $1 (11... Nd7 {is more modest:} 12. h4 $1
c5 (12... g6 $6 13. h5 g5 14. Qf5) 13. g4 {, beginning an attack, but after}
cxd4 14. exd4 Qc7 $1 {White has not yet discovered an advantage.}) 12. dxc5 ({
Now after} 12. g4 {(or 12 h4)} cxd4 13. exd4 Nc6 {Black is even more
successful in creating counterplay (the source game: Uhlmann-Spassky, Moscow
1967).}) 12... Nd7 $1 {This splendid pawn sacrifice was a fresh idea, which
before this had occurred literally only twice.} ({Usually Black played
differently:} 12... Bxc3 13. Qxc3 Nd7 ({or} 13... Qe7 14. Qe5 Qxc5+ 15. Kb1 Nd7
{(Ovechkin-Bologan, Moscow 2003)} 16. Qf4 $1 {with slightly the better chances
for White}) 14. c6 Bxc6 15. Kb1 Rc8 16. Qd4 {(Polugayevsky-Ivkov, Beverwijk
1966).}) (12... bxc5 13. Nxd5 Bxd5 14. Bc4 Nd7 15. Rxd5 Rb8 16. b3 {- this
position had been considered promising for Black, but by the time of the
tournament in Baku White had refuted the earlier assessment:} Qe7 ({or} 16...
Qc7 17. Kd1 Rfc8 {, and now not} 18. Ke2 $2 ({but} 18. Nd2 $1 {(the blockade
on c4!)} Nb6 19. Rd3 {and Ke2 also with an advantage (I found and analysed all
this before the games cited)}) 18... Nb6 19. Rd2 Nxc4 20. Qxc4 Rb4 21. Qa6 c4
22. bxc4 Bc3 23. Rc2 Rb6 24. Qa4 Rb4 {½-½ (Gavrikov-Lputian, Riga 1980)})
17. h4 $1 Nb6 18. Re5 $1 Qc7 (18... Bxe5 $2 19. Ng5) 19. Re4 $1 {, retaining
the extra pawn and maintaining the blockade at c4 (Lapenis-A.Petrosian, Moscow
1979). --- Naturally, Black began pinning all his hopes on the move 12...Nd7.
When analysing this position earlier, I had come to the conclusion that the
capture of the d5-pawn would allow White to fight for the initiative.}) 13.
Nxd5 {(7) A novelty.} ({In the event of} 13. cxb6 $6 Qxb6 {Black's activity
more than compensates for the pawn deficit (Lapenis-Klovans, Moscow 1979).}) ({
Play against an 'isolani' -} 13. c6 Bxc6 14. Nd4 Bb7 {also did not appeal to
me, since White could have quickly ended up in an inferior position:} 15. -- (
15. Be2 a6 $1 16. Kb1 b5 17. Bf3 $6 Rc8 {(Lputian-A.Petrosian, Yerevan 1980)})
(15. Kb1 a6 $5 (15... Nc5 {is also good, Borisenko-Adashev, Tashkent 1969}) 16.
g4 b5 17. Bg2 (17. h4 b4 $1) 17... Rc8 {(Nikolic-Lputian, Sarajevo 1983)}) (15.
g4 Ne5 $1 (15... Nc5 {is also suitable}) ({or even} 15... a6 16. h4 b5 17. g5
b4 18. gxf6 $1) 16. Be2 Nc6 $1 {(Ubilava-Kharitonov, Tallinn 1983)}) (15. h4
Nc5 ({apart from} 15... Ne5) ({or} 15... a6) 16. g4 {(Nguyen Chi Minh-Chau,
France 2004)} Bxd4 $1 17. exd4 (17. Rxd4 Ne6 18. Rd1 d4) 17... Ne4 {, and
Black is perfectly alright.})) 13... Nxc5 ({At home I had also analysed} 13...
Rc8 {.} 14. -- ({. Now} 14. Kb1 $6 Rxc5 15. Qf5 {(Dreev-Leko, Moscow (blitz)
2007) is dangerous because of} Rxd5 16. Rxd5 g6 $1 {, seizing the initiative:}
17. Rxd7 (17. Qxd7 Bxd5) ({or} 17. Qd3 Qa8 $1 18. e4 Nc5 19. Qc4 Nxe4) 17...
gxf5 18. Rxd8 Rxd8 {.}) ({. It is stronger to play as follows:} 14. Nxf6+ Qxf6
15. Rxd7 Bxf3 (15... Rxc5 $2 16. Qxc5) 16. gxf3 Rxc5 17. Bc4 Rfc8 ({after} 
17... Qxf3 $2 18. Rhd1 {Black loses a piece}) ({and in the event of} 17... Qc6
$6 18. Rd4 b5 19. Rg1 {- a pawn}) 18. Rhd1 {, when an equal queen endgame is
reached after this move.} ({but I was intending to follow a different, more
risky course:} 18. b3 $5 b5 19. Rhd1 bxc4 20. b4 Rb5 21. R7d6 {which leads to
very sharp play}) 18... Rxc4 19. Rd8+ Rxd8 20. Rxd8+ Qxd8 21. Qxc4 Qg5 $1 {½-½ (Ghitescu-A.Petrosian, Bagneux 1982). --- However, Black has no reason
to go in for such excitement: after 13...Nxc5 he has a very promising position.
})) 14. Bc4 {(22)} (14. e4 $2 Rc8 15. Kb1 Re8 {is bad for White}) ({while the
tempting} 14. Qf5 {is parried by} Qc8 $1 15. Nxf6+ gxf6 16. Qxc8 Raxc8 17. Kd2
(17. Kb1 $6 Ne4) 17... Ne4+ 18. Ke1 Rc2 {, when after} 19. Rb1 {White can draw
at best.}) 14... b5 $1 (14... Rc8 15. Kb1 b5 $1 {is also possible.}) 15. Nxf6+
{(9)} ({The incautious} 15. Bxb5 $2 Bxd5 16. Bc4 {runs into a spectacular
queen sacrifice -} Be4 $1 17. Rxd8 Rfxd8 {with a decisive attack:} 18. Qe2 Nd3+
19. Bxd3 Bxd3 {and ...Rac8+.}) ({Black also has an excellent game in the
variation} 15. Bb3 Rc8 16. Kb1 Re8 $1 17. Rhe1 Nxb3 18. Qxb3 Rc5 {(evicting
the knight from d5)} 19. e4 Rxe4 20. Rxe4 Bxd5 {.}) 15... Qxf6 16. Bd5 ({After
} 16. Bxb5 $2 Rfc8 {(not the only way)} 17. Bc4 Be4 18. Qc3 Na4 19. Qxf6 Rxc4+
20. Qc3 Nxc3 21. bxc3 Rb8 22. Kd2 Rb2+ 23. Ke1 Rxc3 24. Nd4 Rxa2 {White cannot
defend himself.}) 16... Rac8 17. Kb1 {(3)} Na4 ({Later I discovered that} 17...
Ne6 $5 {is also favourable for Black:} 18. Qb3 ({or} 18. Qe4 Rc4 $1 19. Nd4 (
19. Qe5 Qg6+) 19... Bxd5 20. Qxd5 Nxd4 21. Rxd4 Rxd4 22. exd4 Rd8 $1) 18...
Bxd5 19. Qxd5 Qg6+ 20. Qd3 Qxg2 {.}) 18. Qe2 Bxd5 19. Rxd5 {The menacing
position of the knight at a4 together with the not altogether secure position
of the white king promises Black counterplay, with which, however, he has to
hurry, as otherwise in a move or two White will consolidate his position.} Rc4
$1 {A brilliant move, which immediately changes the picture.} ({In my analyses
I had considered only} 19... Qg6+ 20. e4 {and I had judged} Qxg2 {(?)} ({or} 
20... Rfe8 21. Re1 Qxg2 {(?!)} 22. Rxb5 {to be in my favour}) ({overlooking,
alas,} 20... Rc4 $1 21. Rd4 Rfc8 22. Rg1 a6 {with excellent play for Black})
21. Rg1 Qh3 22. Rg3 Qe6 23. Nd4 Qf6 24. Nf5 {. --- But now, while intensifying
the threat of ...Qg6+, Black has also created two more - ...Rfc8 and, above
all, ...Rb4. On seeing all this, I became despondent...}) 20. Rd4 {(14) This
reply is forced.} ({The pawn capture} 20. Rxb5 $2 {allows Black a terribly
strong attack after} Rfc8 21. Ne5 Qa6 $1 22. Nxc4 Qxb5 23. Rc1 Rxc4 $1 {(} 24.
Rxc4 $2 Nc3+ {, winning the queen).}) (20. Nd4 $6 {is also weak because of}
Qg6+ {and ...Qxg2.}) 20... Rfc8 {It is now completely clear that Black has
full compensation for the sacrificed pawn. But despite the failure of my
opening, I managed to take myself in hand - the battle was only just beginning,
and Zaitsev had little more than 20 minutes left on his clock.} 21. Rhd1 {(15)}
({Not} 21. Rxc4 $2 bxc4 {and ...Rb8}) ({while} 21. Qd3 $2 {(with the idea of
21...Rc2 22 Rd8+) is strongly met by the unexpected} Nc5 $1 22. -- (22. Qd1
Qg6+ 23. Ka1 Qxg2) ({, if} 22. Qe2 Qg6+ 23. Ka1 {, then} Rc1+ $1 24. Rxc1 Nb3+
$1 25. axb3 Rxc1+ 26. Ka2 Qb1+ 27. Ka3 a5 $1 {with unavoidable mate}) ({, or} 
22. Rxc4 Nxd3 23. Rxc8+ Kh7 24. Rc3 (24. Rc2 Nb4 $1) 24... Nxb2 $1 25. Rhc1 Nc4
26. R1c2 Qg6 {, and White's position is unenviable.})) ({Therefore with} 21.
Rhd1 {he agrees to give up his queen for two rooks. At first sight, the
position after} Rc2 $1 22. Qxc2 {forced;} ({after} 22. Rd8+ $2 Kh7 {Black wins}
) 22... Rxc2 23. Kxc2 {is clearly in Black's favour: he destroys the
opponent's kingside -} Qg6+ $1 ({the weaker} 23... Qe6 24. R1d3 Qxa2 25. Rb3 {
leads to equality}) 24. e4 $2 ({however,} 24. Kd2 $1 {is correct:} Nxb2 25. Rc1
Qxg2 26. Ke2 Qg6 $1 ({if} 26... Nc4 {, then} 27. a4 $1 a6 28. axb5 axb5 29. Rb1
Qg6 30. Rxb5 {with equality, Ghitescu-Lputian, Berlin 1982}) 27. Rc7 $1 Qa6 $1
(27... a5 28. Rd8+ {and Rdd7}) 28. Kf1 $1 Qxa2 29. Rd8+ Kh7 30. Rdd7 {, and
White nevertheless gains a draw}) 24... Qxg2 25. Ne5 Nc5 $1 26. Kb1 Qxf2 {.
--- The critical moment of the game. Not seeing any real benefits after 21...
Rc2, Zaitsev, who up until now has played splendidly, overrates his chances
and commits a serious mistake.}) 21... Qg6+ $2 22. Qd3 {(3)} Qxg2 {Black has
restored material equality, but... Apparently the preceding part of the battle
had cost the grandmaster too much effort, and he overlooked my reply.} 23. Qf5
$1 {(3) Unexpectedly the position has again changed sharply: White has
succeeded in lining up his forces, and things have become uncomfortable for
the black king, even behind its sound pawn defences.} Rf8 $2 ({To avoid my
counterattack, Black should have exchanged the queens -} 23... Qg6 24. Qxg6
fxg6 {, agreeing to an unpleasant endgame after} 25. Ne5 {, in which his
chances of a draw and a loss would have been roughly equal. Zaitsev avoids
defending in an ending and decides to try his luck with the queens on, setting
some clever traps on the way.}) 24. Rd8 $1 {(4)} (24. Rg1 {(?) looked very
tempting, hoping for} Qxf2 $2 ({but it was here that Black's first 'bomb'
would have exploded -} 24... Rc5 $1 25. Qe4 Qh3 {, and all dangers are behind
him}) 25. Rd2 Qxe3 26. Rxg7+ $1 {with mate.}) 24... Rc7 $2 {The decisive
mistake.} (24... Nb6 {was necessary, although after} 25. Rxf8+ (25. Ne5 $5)
25... Kxf8 26. Nd4 {Black would have faced a difficult defence.}) 25. Rxf8+ {
(13)} ({The game would have been concluded more spectacularly by} 25. Qe5 $1
Qg6+ 26. e4 Rc8 27. Rxc8 Rxc8 28. Rg1 Qh7 29. Nd4 {and Nf5.}) 25... Kxf8 26.
Nd4 $1 {(the simplest)} Re7 ({Or} 26... Kg8 27. Nxb5 g6 28. Qf4 {.}) 27. Nxb5 {
(3)} ({Avoiding the last trap, set by the opponent who was now in severe
time-trouble:} 27. Qxb5 $4 Nc3+ $1 {.}) 27... Rxe3 $6 {A desperate chance;} (
27... g6 28. Qf6 $1 Qe4+ 29. Kc1 Qc4+ 30. Nc3 Re8 31. Rd4 Qf1+ 32. Nd1 Rc8+ 33.
Kd2 Nb6 34. Qh8+ Ke7 35. Re4+ Kd7 36. Qd4+ {etc. was hopeless for Black.}) 28.
Nd6 (28. Rd8+ $1 Re8 29. Rxe8+ Kxe8 30. Qe5+ {would have led to mate.}) 28...
Rf3 ({After} 28... Kg8 29. Qxf7+ Kh7 30. Qf5+ Kg8 31. Qc8+ Kh7 32. Qc2+ {Black
would have lost his stray rook.}) 29. Qc8+ Ke7 30. Qe8+ Kf6 ({And Black
resigned in view of} 30... Kf6 31. Qxf7+ Kg5 32. Rd5+ {with a quick mate. The
once menacing knight on a4 remains merely as a reminder of that beautiful song,
which Black cut short when he was tempted by the g2-pawn. --- Times: 1.52-2.28.
--- This game, along with a number of others (with Beliavsky etc.), showed
that my 'junior' opening preparation did not fully match up to the level of
the 'adult' tournaments in which I was now participating. The transition
period was to last two years and it ended in Tilburg 1981. By that time my
opening repertoire was completely formed, I had a clear understanding of what
and why I was playing, and from late 1981 a new surge would begin. --- After
my win over Zaitsev I somewhat unexpectedly slowed down, making three draws 
(moreover, in the 8th round I only just saved a rook ending a pawn down in my
game with Mikhalchishin: with one nervy time-trouble move my opponent lost all
his advantage), and I was caught by Beliavsky. Five rounds before the finish
we both had 7 points out of 10, with Chiburdanidze on 6½. To achieve the
grandmaster norm, I needed to win (and definitely not lose!).}) 1-0

[Event "42: USSR Central Chess Club, Baku"]
[Site "?"]
[Date "1980.04.12"]
[Round "11"]
[White "Kasparov, G."]
[Black "Chiburdanidze, M."]
[Result "1-0"]
[ECO "E92"]
[Annotator "Garry Kasparov"]
[PlyCount "80"]
[EventDate "1980.??.??"]
[Source "Everyman Chess"]
[SourceDate "2012.11.28"]

{The 11th round game with Maya Chiburdanidze was one of my best, and in
general one of the most interesting games in the tournament. That day I had to
withstand an unusual psychological pressure: it was difficult playing the lady
world champion in my native Baku, before the eyes of numerous fans who
expected only victory of me.} 1. d4 Nf6 2. c4 g6 3. Nc3 Bg7 {At that time,
under the influence of her trainer Gufeld, Maya used to employ the sharp
King's Indian (my opening!), and playing against the lady world champion was
psychologically difficult, since Gufeld had warned everyone beforehand: 'You
will be afraid!' (and playing White against Maya in the last round, he himself
appeared to be trembling with fear).} 4. e4 d6 5. Nf3 ({Against me before this
they had played this move,} 5. h3 {(Game No.10)}) (5. f3 {(Game Nos. 12, 15)})
({and} 5. Be2 O-O 6. Bg5 {(Game No.28), whereas my 'White' experience was
considerably more modest.}) 5... O-O 6. Be2 e5 ({In a game with me (Banja Luka
1979) Vukic had problems after} 6... Bg4 7. Be3 Nfd7 8. Ng1 $1 Bxe2 9. Ngxe2 e5
10. O-O a5 $6 ({the immediate} 10... exd4 {is better}) 11. Qd2 Nc6 12. f3 exd4
13. Nxd4 Nc5 14. Rad1 Ne6 $6 15. Ndb5 $1 {with a clear advantage.}) 7. Be3 {(3)
} ({Not yet knowing exactly what to do as White in the main lines with} 7. O-O
{(Game No.21), I chose a set-up that I had discussed with Magerramov.}) 7...
Qe7 ({Later, after trying virtually all the possible replies against Karpov, I
came to recommend the double-edged} 7... Ng4 8. Bg5 f6 9. Bh4 ({if} 9. Bc1 {,
then} Nc6 ({or} 9... exd4 10. Nxd4 f5)) 9... g5 10. Bg3 Nh6 {(Speelman-Kasparov
Speelman-Kasparov, Madrid (rapid) 1988).}) 8. d5 (8. dxe5 dxe5 9. Nd5 $1 {is
better, as Karpov played against me in the 3rd game of our 1990 match (Game No.
10 in 'Kasparov vs. Karpov 1988-2009'). It was because of this that 7...Qe7
practically went out of use.}) 8... Ng4 9. Bg5 f6 10. Bh4 h5 $6 {A second-rate
move, weakening the pawn structure.} (10... Qe8 11. h3 Nh6 {has also been
played (Tal-Sax, Olympiad, Malta 1980)}) ({but the immediate} 10... Nh6 {is
best, for example:} 11. Nd2 a5 12. a3 Bd7 13. b4 g5 14. Bg3 f5 15. exf5 axb4
16. f6 Bxf6 17. axb4 Rxa1 18. Qxa1 e4 {(Ivanchuk-Ehlvest, 55th USSR
Championship, Moscow 1988).}) 11. h3 {(3)} ({Later I played} 11. Nd2 {
immediately, with the idea of} Nh6 ({or} 11... c5 12. dxc6 $1 bxc6 13. b4 Be6
14. O-O Nd7 15. Nb3 {with unpleasant pressure for White (Kasparov-Morrison,
Graz 1981)}) (11... a5 {is better}) 12. f3 {and then b2-b4 (Tukmakov-Stein,
39th USSR Championship, Leningrad 1971).}) 11... Nh6 12. Nd2 c5 {(trying to
impede White's offensive on the queenside)} 13. Nf1 {(22)} ({Already then I
was considering the interesting} 13. dxc6 $5 bxc6 14. b4 {, but as yet I was
not ready for a sharp change in the pawn structure and I restricted myself to
a good knight manoeuvre.}) 13... Nf7 $6 {'An untimely move, assisting the
exchange of bishops which is strategically favourable for White.} (13... Na6 {
was more advisable, with the standard idea of ...Nc7, ...Bd7, ...a7-a6 and ...b7-b5' (Nikitin). To this I would have replied} 14. Ne3 {, continuing to
prepare g2-g4 and all the same retaining the better prospects.}) 14. g4 {(11)}
hxg4 ({Closing the flank by} 14... g5 15. Bg3 h4 16. Bh2 Nh8 {would have left
Black with a 'dead' bishop on g7, and after} 17. Ne3 Ng6 18. f3 Nf4 {(here the
knight looks well placed, but it is ineffective)} 19. Bf1 {followed by Bg1,
Rh2, a2-a3, b2-b4, Rb2 and a possible Nf5 the play would all have been one way.
After Nf5 White could have played Be3, Kf2-g1-h2 and calmly attacked on the
queenside.}) 15. Bxg4 $1 {This capture was underestimated by Maya and she
clearly became rattled.} g5 $2 {The decisive mistake - a fatal weakening of
the light squares.} (15... Bxg4 $6 16. Qxg4 g5 {was also bad in view of} 17.
Ne3 ({or immediately} 17. Bg3 Nh6 18. Qe2 {(h5)}) 17... Nh6 18. Qh5 Qf7 19.
Qxf7+ Rxf7 20. Bg3 {(Stohl).}) ({Also after} 15... Nh6 16. Bxc8 Rxc8 17. Rg1
Kh7 {(Stohl)} 18. Ne3 {followed by Qe2, 0-0-0, Rg2 and Rdg1}) ({or} 15... Nd7
$5 16. Rg1 Kh7 17. Ne3 Bh6 18. Qf3 {Black's defence is difficult, but she
could still have resisted.}) 16. Bxc8 {(6)} ({Perhaps Maya was expecting} 16.
Bg3 f5 {(to activate the bishop on g7), when after the possible} 17. exf5 ({or
} 17. Bxf5 Bxf5 18. exf5 Nd7 19. Ne3 e4 20. Qc2 {(h5) things are also not easy
for Black, but she has at least a gleam of counterplay}) 17... e4 18. Qc2 {.
--- However, I found a combinative solution to the position.}) 16... Rxc8 17.
Ne3 $1 {(6) 'What was staggering was not so much the boldness of this
unexpected knight jump, but the speed with which the decision was taken to
sacrifice the bishop' (Nikitin).} ({Especially as the prosaic} 17. Bg3 f5 18.
exf5 (18. Ne3 $5) 18... e4 19. Qc2 {was also unpromising for Black.}) 17...
gxh4 ({There is no longer anything else:} 17... Nh6 18. Bg3 f5 19. exf5 e4 20.
h4 $1 {- Stohl.}) 18. Nf5 {I sensed that White's attack along the g-file would
be irresistible: Black's downfall is caused by the uncoordinated state of her
pieces. Incidentally, in the aforementioned game with Morrison the outcome was
also decided by a knight invasion at f5.} Qd8 ({Or} 18... Qd7 19. Qh5 $1 Ng5
20. O-O-O {and Qxh4, while if} Bf8 {, then} 21. Qg6+ Bg7 22. f4 $1 exf4 23. Nb5
{and Nbxd6 with crushing threats.}) ({Or if} 18... Qf8 $5 {(without a loss of
tempo) I was planning} 19. Qg4 Na6 {(d7)} ({or} 19... Rc7 20. Rg1 Ng5 21. Nxh4
{followed by Nf5, h3-h4, 0-0-0 (or Ke2) and the doubling of rooks on the
g-file, although here it would have been more difficult to breach Black's
defences than in the game.}) ({In 'Informator' I gave only} 19... Ng5 20. Nxh4
Na6 21. Nf5 Nc7 22. h4 Nh7 {, which is worse because of} 23. h5 $1 Ng5 24. h6 {
and wins - Stohl.})) 19. Qg4 Ng5 20. Nxh4 $1 ({In the event of the thoughtless
} 20. Nxd6 $6 Na6 21. Nxc8 $2 (21. Nf5 $1) 21... Qxc8 22. Qh5 Qe8 {White would
have lost all his advantage.}) 20... Rc7 21. Nf5 a6 ({If} 21... Na6 22. h4 Nh7
23. Rg1 Qf8 {, then} 24. Nb5 {- Stohl.}) 22. h4 Nh7 23. Rg1 {(5)} Qf8 {On this
occasion the widely-publicised 'Gufeld bishop' makes a pitiful impression -
right to the end it does not move from g7.} 24. Ke2 (24. O-O-O $5 {.}) 24...
Ra7 25. a4 {Killing any counterplay.} b6 26. Qh5 Kh8 27. Rg6 Rd7 28. Rag1 {
After completing the mobilisation of my forces, I thought that I would win
automatically. However, to breach the opponent's defences a final effort is
still required of White.} Rab7 29. Qg4 Rbc7 30. Rg2 ({A rapid capitulation
would have been forced by} 30. h5 $1 Ng5 31. h6 Bxh6 32. Rh1 $1 Rh7 33. Nxh6
Rcg7 ({or} 33... Nd7 34. Rh5) 34. Rxf6 $1 {. But for some reason I decided
first to safeguard my king.}) 30... Rb7 31. Kf1 ({Once again} 31. h5 $5 {.})
31... Ra7 32. Kg1 Rf7 33. Ne2 $1 {(unexpectedly the second knight is also
included in the attack - via g3)} Qc8 (33... Qg8 {would also not have helped:}
34. h5 Nf8 35. Rh2 $5 {(one of many possibilities: h5-h6 is threatened)} Qh7
36. Neg3 Rad7 37. h6 Nxg6 38. hxg7+ {etc.}) 34. f4 {(5)} ({'The harvest after} 
34. Nxd6 $6 Qxg4 35. Nxf7+ Rxf7 36. R6xg4 {is too miserly for such an
overwhelming position' (Nikitin). With the move in the game I wanted to win
with maximum comfort: to deprive the black knight of the g5-square before
playing h4-h5.}) ({However, the simplest was} 34. Neg3 $1 {with the threat of
Nh5, and if} Nf8 {, then} 35. Qh5+ Nh7 36. Nxd6 Qf8 37. Nxf7+ {and Nf5.}) 34...
b5 (34... exf4 35. Nxf4 {is even worse for Black.}) 35. axb5 axb5 36. cxb5 {
(it was for the sake of this opening of the position that I played my king to
g1, in order to hide it at h2)} Rab7 37. h5 $1 {(2) With the murderous threat
of h5-h6. There follows a brief agony for Black.} Nf8 38. Qh3 {Once again
ignoring the d6-pawn.} Nxg6 ({There is no salvation:} 38... c4 39. h6) ({or} 
38... Qd8 39. R6g3 $1 {and h5-h6 (Stohl).}) 39. hxg6+ Kg8 40. gxf7+ (40. Qh7+
$1 Kf8 41. gxf7 {would have mated more quickly.}) 40... Kf8 {. And Black
resigned without waiting for 41 Rxg7. --- Times: 1.33-2.28. --- 'A terrible
rout!' (Nikitin).} (40... Kf8 {. Inspired by this win, I won two more games in
crushing style - against Silvino Garcia and Antoshin, took my score to 10 out
of 13, and two rounds before the finish achieved the grandmaster norm for the
second time. The spectators applauded, and Gufeld, who came up to congratulate
me, exclaimed: 'Remember this historic moment - you have become a
grandmaster!' --- Now I had to avoid conceding 1st place: Beliavsky was just
half a point behind. In the 14th round we both drew, and everything was
decided by the last, 15th round. With White, as expected, Beliavsky
confidently defeated Garcia, and I beat Martinovic (in the variation 1 d4 Nf6
2 Nf3 g6 3 Bg5 Bg7 4 Nbd2), which enabled me to become the sole winner of the
tournament.} 41. -- {Gufeld: 'Towards the end of the tournament the gap
between the leaders and the remaining participants increased with every round,
Beliavsky all the time having to perform the role of pursuer, and in the end
having to be satisfied with 2nd place. The winners achieved very high scores,
and succeeded in remaining undefeated throughout this difficult tournament.
Kasparov's name is well known in the chess world. In recent times the young
player has achieved a number of remarkable successes, and in Baku he exceeded
the international grandmaster norm. The play of the talented Baku player is
characterised by a wonderful knowledge of opening theory (?! - G.K.), a broad
arsenal of tactical and technical techniques, and notable progress in deeply
penetrating into the secrets of strategy.' --- Asriyan: 'By winning the
international tournament in Baku, the 17-year-old Kasparov became the youngest
grandmaster in the world. On the evening when this remarkable event occurred,
I was able to report this by express telegram to TASS, and it was broadcast on
the TV program Vremya two hours after the new grandmaster appeared. Kasparov
was staggered by such efficiency - I was congratulated as though I myself had
become a grandmaster.'} (41. -- {Two months after the tournament I passed my
final exams and left school with a gold medal (which the newspapers also did
not fail to report). Nikitin: 'A significant part of this gold medal belonged
to Garik's mother, who all these years was his main and very skilful trainer
in his studies at school.' --- Now, to enter the Institute, I only needed to
pass one exam - on my main subject. And on 14th June 1980 (the day of the
storming of the Bastille!) I passed this exam with an 'excellent' mark and
entered the Azerbaijan Institute of Foreign Languages. My school teachers vied
with one another in advising my mother to choose their subjects for my further
education, the mathematics and literature teachers being particularly
insistent. We also considered the History and Law Faculties. But in the end we
quite reasonably decided that a knowledge of foreign languages would be the
most useful for my chess future.})) 1-0

[Event "?"]
[Site "?"]
[Date "????.??.??"]
[Round "?"]
[White "Chess Prince"]
[Black "?"]
[Result "*"]
[Annotator "Garry Kasparov"]
[PlyCount "1"]
[EventDate "1984.??.??"]
[SourceDate "2009.12.07"]

{World Junior Championship (Dortmund, 16th August - 1st September 1980): 1.
Kasparov - 10½ out of 13; 2. Short - 9; 3. Morovic, 4-5. Negulescu and
Bischoff - 8½; 6-14. Akesson, Tempone, Danailov, Karolyi, Hjorth, Züger, C.Hansen, Arnason and Barua - 8, etc. (altogether 58 participants).} 1. -- {The
invitation to take part in the World Junior Championship in the summer of 1980
pleased me: that which I had failed to do at the World Cadet tournaments in
Wattignies (1976) and Cagnes-sur-Mer (1977) might now be achieved in Dortmund.
--- However, this led to my first serious dispute with Botvinnik, who, as
usual, was categorically against my participation in a Swiss tournament. The
maestro stated forcibly: 'You don't need this! All the same you won't win any
laurels, and in the event of a failure there will be any amount of
unpleasantness. Why subject yourself to an unnecessary trial?!' And, indeed,
there seemed to be no one there to compete with me: already with a rating of
over 2600, I was rapidly approaching the top ten in the world. But I had
certain obligations to the Sports Committee and I did not want to let down
Anatoly Bykhovsky, the trainer of the USSR youth team. It wasn't good to
refuse, and I disobeyed the Teacher - I went to the championship.} (1. -- {For
the first time in my life I tried keeping a diary of a tournament. Alas, my
enthusiasm sufficed only to describe the events before the start: 'Day one -
14th August. The flight from Moscow to Frankfurt passed off without any
particular anxiety. There was only one memorable moment, when Bykhovsky took
out of his bag the current issue of the magazine Yunost and invited me to read
an article by Mikhail Botvinnik. "The strength of his combinative talent puts
him (i.e. me) on a par with the great Alekhine", Bykhovsky once more savoured
this line. "I wonder what the Patriarch will say if you finish third in the
world championship?" Later Bykhovsky himself picturesquely depicted the
situation that was most probable in the event of my failure. The three hours
passed imperceptibly, and we were already in Frankfurt... --- 'Day three -
16th August. From the very start the day promised to be interesting. In the
morning at breakfast someone greeted Bykhovsky. The "people" gradually began
arriving. Half of the participants were present at lunch. Most gazed at me in
surprise: "What's he doing here?" (such puzzled looks would accompany me
throughout the tournament). I also saw an "old acquaintance" - the Pole Weider,
whom I had played in Cagnes-sur-Mer. After loitering about the whole day with
nothing to do, at about 6 we went down into the foyer. We were led out of the
hotel, loaded into buses and taken to some unknown destination. On the way, in
English and German, we were briefly acquainted with some of the sights of
Dortmund. From the guide's description I understood only three words: beer,
steel and corporation. Apparently the description was based on using these
three words in various combinations. Soon we arrived at some building. We were
unloaded, and the bus set off for the "second party". From the outside it was
hard to determine the function of this building, but when we went inside it
turned out to be a beer factory (the main sponsor of the championship - G.K.).
--- 'The opening ceremony took place in an enormous hall - probably the
tasting-room. There was a lot of noise, rumpus - and beer. (They also provided
lemonade, but most of the players preferred beer. However, I, as usual, tried
to be different.). The tournament was opened by Lothar Schmid. After a mass of
welcoming speeches (again beer, steel etc.), the pairings were made. From a
drum some "Miss" drew numbers on which the names were written. I was assigned
No.36, while No.35 went to some obscure Dutchman. "That means, White in the
first game," I remarked to myself. Incidentally, Schmid singled me out at the
drawing of lots, emphasising my titles. When Benjamin was drawn, Bykhovsky was
horrified: "Since he's so puny, he's bound to play brilliantly..." Then there
were oceans of beer and cola and a buffet for 250 people. We went back in high
spirits. I was eager for the fight, while Bykhovsky was looking forward to
more bottles of Dortmund beer - there are about 500 types in the city...'}) (1.
-- {Among the participants in the championship there were many future
grandmasters and international masters, well-known in the chess world. There
were the experienced 19-year-old 'old men': the Icelander Jon Arnason (the
world cadet champion of 1977), the Swede Ralf Akesson (European junior
champion 1980/81 - 11½ out of 13!), the Romanian Adrian Negulescu (who
shared 3rd place at the 1979 world junior championship), the German Klaus
Bischoff, the Yugoslav Branko Damljanovic, the Bulgarian Silvio Danailov (now
Topalov's manager, and also President of the European Chess Union), and the
Hungarian Tibor Karolyi (the author of some books on my games). And the
audacious youth: the 17-year-old Chilean Ivan Morovic (who played in five
world junior championships!), the Argentinean Marcelo Tempone (world cadet
champion 1979, who not long before had scored a sensational win over Petrosian
at a tournament in Buenos Aires), the nearly 16-year-old Dane Curt Hansen, the
Turk Suat Atalik, the 15-year-old American Joel Benjamin, the Indonesian Utut
Adianto, the Englishman Nigel Short (the new hope of the West, who was to
challenge for the world crown in 1993), and the 14-year-old Indian Dibyendu
Barua. --- I too was only seventeen, but I was regarded as the clear favourite,
and everyone was expecting me to win. However, such expectations can turn to
nothing, especially if, after becoming used to the way in which adults play,
you don't readjust in games with your contemporaries. --- Bykhovsky: 'In the
history of junior championships there have been instances when a clear
favourite underestimated his opponents and altogether finished outside the
prize-winners. On this occasion this did not happen: Garik took the event very
seriously. Before the tournament some advised the young grandmaster to play
"on technique", exploiting his superiority in class. Fortunately, Kasparov did
not follow their advice and in all the games he went in for complicated play
with chances for both sides. His games were always interesting, and usually
most of the spectators crowded around his board (the seats were occupied long
before the start of play).'}) (1. -- {I began with three wins, and after four
rounds I had 3½ points and was leading together with Arnason, Akesson and
Negulescu, half a point ahead of Short, Tempone and another three players.
Then, 'by Swiss custom', the most important clashes between the rivals began.
In the 5th round Akesson won against Negulescu, Tempone against Short, and
after an adjournment I beat Arnason in an interesting ending (two bishops and
a-pawn against bishop, knight and f-pawn). Thus Akesson and I reached 4½ out
of 5 and our individual meeting occurred in the next round. This crazy game
was probably my best creative achievement in Dortmund (see the following game).
}) *

[Event "43: World Junior Championship, Dortmund"]
[Site "?"]
[Date "1980.08.22"]
[Round "6"]
[White "Kasparov, G."]
[Black "Akesson, R."]
[Result "1-0"]
[ECO "E12"]
[Annotator "Garry Kasparov"]
[PlyCount "71"]
[EventDate "1980.??.??"]
[Source "Everyman Chess"]
[SourceDate "2012.11.28"]

1. d4 Nf6 2. c4 e6 3. Nf3 (3. Nc3 {- Game No.39.}) 3... b6 4. a3 {Again my
main weapon of that time;} (4. g3 {- Game Nos. 45, 46.}) 4... Bb7 ({I was also
not concerned about} 4... Ba6 {(Game Nos. 32, 68)} 5. Qc2 Bb7 6. Nc3 c5 7. e4
cxd4 8. Nxd4 {, for example:} Bc5 9. Nb3 Nc6 10. Bg5 a6 11. O-O-O {
(Kasparov-van der Wiel, Amsterdam 1988).}) 5. Nc3 d5 (5... Ne4 {- Game No.61.})
6. cxd5 Nxd5 {A popular response to the set-up with a2-a3.} ({The capture with
the pawn -} 6... exd5 {is hardly any worse, but it is slightly more passive
and it creates a different pawn structure, which is not to everyone's taste;
against Bukic (Banja Luka 1979) I successfully replied} 7. Bg5 Be7 8. Bxf6 $5
Bxf6 9. g3 {, and against Antoshin (Baku 1980) and A.Ivanov (Moscow 1981) - 7
g3 immediately. Now, however, White gains the opportunity to create a mobile
pawn centre.}) 7. e3 (7. Qc2 {- Game Nos. 73, 75, 98.}) 7... Be7 {The most
natural move;} ({but} 7... g6 $5 {is more perplexing for the opponent - as
Korchnoi played against me in the 1st game of our Candidates match (Game No.38
in Volume V of 'My Great Predecessors').}) 8. Bb5+ c6 9. Bd3 Nxc3 {(6)} ({After
} 9... O-O {White has the additional resource} 10. Qc2 ({while} 10. e4 Nxc3 11.
bxc3 c5 12. O-O cxd4 (12... h6 $2 13. Bf4 {, Kasparov-Marjanovic, Banja Luka
1979; Game No.100 in 'Revolution in the 70s'}) 13. cxd4 Nc6 14. Be3 Rc8 {
transposes into the main line (cf. the note to Black's 10th move).})) ({But
the most radical solution to Black's opening problems is} 9... c5 $5 10. Nxd5
exd5 {with a solid enough position.} ({Even} 10... Qxd5 {, a move criticised
by theory, is acceptable (Petrosian-Smyslov, 28th USSR Championship, Moscow
1961; Game No.14 in Volume III of 'My Great Predecessors')}) ({or} 10... Bxd5
11. dxc5 bxc5 {(Karpov-Najdorf, Mar del Plata 1982; Kasparov-Karpov, Zurich 
(blitz) 2006). This deprives White of a traditional trump - his mobile pawn
centre, although each of the captures on d5 has some drawbacks, and 9...c5 has
not had many supporters.})) 10. bxc3 Nd7 (10... c5 {is more energetic:} 11. O-O
Nc6 $1 (11... O-O 12. Qc2 {- Game No.52}) 12. e4 (12. Bb2 $5 {- Game No.85})
12... O-O 13. Be3 cxd4 14. cxd4 Rc8 15. Ra2 $6 (15. Qe2 {- Kasparov-Najdorf,
Bugojno 1982}) 15... Bf6 16. Bb1 g6 17. Qd3 Qd7 18. Rd2 Rfd8 {with excellent
play for Black (Kasparov-Karolyi, 13th round). It was because of this game
that I suffered a temporary crisis in the 4 a3 variation, and three months
later at the Olympiad I played only 4 g3.}) 11. e4 c5 {(3)} 12. O-O {(4)} cxd4
{(4)} (12... O-O {is more accurate, maintaining the tension in the centre at
least until White determines the position of his queen's bishop. After} 13. Qe2
(13. d5 $6 exd5 14. exd5 c4 $1 15. Bxc4 Nf6 {, picking up the passed d-pawn})
13... Qc7 14. Bb2 {a fashionable tabiya arises (a joint one with the 7 Qc2
variation), where Black has tried} Rac8 {(Kasparov-Kramnik, Linares 2004),} (
14... Rfe8 {(Agrest-Akesson, Sweden 2006)}) (14... Rfd8 {(Ponomariov-Leko,
Moscow 2006)}) ({and Polugayevsky's old move} 14... c4 $6 {(Carlsen-Aronian,
5th match game, Elista 2007).})) 13. cxd4 O-O 14. Qe2 {A typical move with the
intention of Bb2, Ra(f)d1 and d4-d5. To me this seemed to be the optimal
set-up, but I underestimated Black's defensive resources.} ({Little is
promised by} 14. e5 {with the idea of Be3 and Nd2-e4 (this cramps Black, but
relieves him of the potential threat d4-d5)}) ({or} 14. Be3 Rc8 {
(Petrosian-Geller, Curaçao Candidates 1962).}) ({However, as also in the 7 Qc2
variation, with the knight on d7 serious consideration should be given to} 14.
Bf4 $5 Rc8 15. Qb3 Nb8 ({or} 15... Nf6 16. Rfe1 {(Khalifman-Blatny, Groningen
1985), retaining the initiative}) 16. Rad1 {(Portisch-Korchnoi, Montpellier
Candidates 1985).}) 14... Rc8 {(8)} 15. Bb2 {(2) A tempting post for the
bishop (in view of the planned d4-d5). All the white pieces are ideally placed,
whereas Black still has to find a comfortable place for his queen.} Qc7 {(16)}
16. Qe3 {(6) It is unclear whether White needs to take control of the
f4-square.} ({If} 16. a4 {there is} Bb4 {- therefore he should not be in a
hurry to advance his a-pawn.}) ({In 'Informator' I suggested} 16. Nd2 $5 {(up
until now this has only occurred in the game Mamedyarov-Sargissian, Reykjavik
2006).}) (16. Rad1 Qf4 17. Nd2 $5 {is also interesting, with the idea of e4-e5
and Ne4 (transposing into a position from the game Bareev-Lutz, Olympiad,
Turin 2006).}) 16... Nf6 {(10)} ({The alternative was} 16... Qb8 {(with the
same idea} 17. a4 Bb4 {)}) ({or} 16... Bd6 {, in order by the threat of Bf4 to
force e4-e5, although after} 17. Rfc1 Qb8 18. e5 Be7 19. Ng5 h6 20. Ne4 {
White's chances are somewhat better.}) 17. Ne5 {(2)} ({Again if} 17. a4 {there
is the good reply} Bb4 {and ...Qe7 - this is how Black defended in my
aforementioned game with Kramnik.}) 17... b5 $1 {(10) Resourceful play:
exploiting the weakness of the e4-pawn, Black opens a loophole for his queen
and deprives the white pieces of the c4-point.} ({In 'The Test of Time' I
suggested that Black shouldn't have reconciled himself to the knight on e5 -} 
17... Nd7 {, but after} 18. Rfc1 $1 (18. f4 $6 Nxe5 {is equal}) 18... Qd6 19.
Nc4 Qb8 20. a4 {and e4-e5 White would have retained the advantage (say,} h6 21.
e5 Qa8 22. f3 Bg5 23. f4 Be7 24. Qe2 {etc.).}) 18. f4 {(3)} Qb6 {(4) The
natural move;} ({but} 18... Bd6 {would also have impeded White's attack.}) 19.
Kh1 $1 ({White is forced to engage in prophylaxis - if immediately} 19. f5 {,
then} Bd6 $1 {, and after} 20. Rae1 exf5 $5 21. Rxf5 Bxe5 22. dxe5 Qxe3+ 23.
Rxe3 Nd7 24. Bxb5 Nc5 {(Stohl) he cannot count on anything.}) 19... b4 $6 {(14)
Over-hasty. In striving to weaken the opponent's attacking potential by
exchanging a pair of bishops and obtaining counterplay, Black loses control of
the c4-point and opens the b-file, which proves advantageous only to White.} (
19... Rc7 {, for example, was better, with the idea of} 20. f5 exf5 21. Rxf5
Ne8 {and ...Nd6-c4. 'On the last six moves Akesson spent more than an hour,
which was far more than Garry. Such a disproportion is usually an indication
of the difficulties encountered by the more pensive side in seeking
counterplay.' (Nikitin)}) 20. axb4 {Of course!} Bxb4 21. Rab1 $1 {Preventing ...Bb4-c3 and creating the threat of Bb2-a3.} ({Again nothing was given by} 21.
f5 exf5 $1 ({but not} 21... Bc3 {(?), as given in 'Informator', on account of}
22. Bxc3 Rxc3 23. Rfb1 {and wins}) 22. Rxf5 Bc3 23. Bxc3 Rxc3 {(Stohl)} 24.
Raf1 Bc8 25. R5f3 ({or} 25. Rg5 Nd7) 25... Ng4 {with equality.}) (21. Nc4 {was
interesting, forcing a sacrifice of material: either the exchange for a pawn -}
Rxc4 ({or a pawn (this is better for Black) -} 21... Qd8 22. e5 Nd5 23. Qh3 g6
24. Rxa7 Qc7 25. Raa1 {, and White retains some advantage}) 22. Bxc4 Nxe4 23.
Bd3 {. But the move in the game is stronger.}) 21... a5 {(5)} 22. Qe2 $1 {(9) 
Also preventing ...Bb7-a6. The d3-bishop must be preserved - in the attack it
will play a no less important role than the b2-bishop.} (22. f5 Ba6 $1 23. fxe6
fxe6 {was harmless, for example:} 24. Rxf6 Rxf6 25. Nd7 Bxd3 26. Nxf6+ gxf6 27.
Qg3+ Kh8 28. Qxd3 Bc3 $1 29. Qc2 Kg7 {with equality.}) 22... Qa7 {(5) 
Defending against Ba3 and switching to a8 to put pressure on the e4-pawn, but
the queen moves too far away from its king.} (22... Qd8 $6 23. f5 Rc7 {would
appear to be more solid, but after} 24. Nxf7 $1 Kxf7 25. fxe6+ Kg8 $1 26. d5 {
White has excellent compensation for the piece.}) ({After} 22... Ra8 23. f5 Ba6
24. fxe6 fxe6 {, suggested by me in 'The Test of Time', White has the
unpleasant} 25. Rxf6 $1 (25. Nc4 Qb7) 25... gxf6 ({or} 25... Rxf6 26. Nd7 Bxd3
27. Nxf6+ gxf6 28. Qxd3 {(Stohl)}) 26. Nd7 Qd6 27. Nxf8 Bxd3 28. Qxd3 Rxf8 29.
d5 {with a slight but enduring advantage, but 24 Nc4! is even better.}) ({The
computer also considers a variation with an exchange sacrifice -} 22... Rfd8
23. f5 $1 exf5 24. Rxf5 Rxd4 $1 25. Bxd4 Qxd4 {, but here too after} 26. Rd1 {
White's chances are better.}) 23. f5 {(3)} Qa8 {(13)} ({Not} 23... Bc3 $2 {in
view of} 24. fxe6 fxe6 25. Bc4 $1 {, winning. Black's hesitation was probably
caused by anxiety over the defensibility of his king's fortress.}) {The first
critical position: how should White continue his attack?} 24. d5 $6 {(5) 
'Judging by the time spent, in his choice of move Garry was guided by
intuition, rather than precise calculation. He decided to give up the
attractive e4-d4 pawn pair, in order to clear the diagonals for his bishops.
But this interesting idea does not give White any real advantage' (Nikitin).} (
{Let us consider the other possibilities:} 24. Ng4 {, and after} Nxe4 ({
however,} 24... Nxg4 $1 25. Qxg4 exf5 26. Rxf5 Ba6 {is sounder, maintaining
the balance}) 25. d5 $1 Nc3 $1 {(the only defence, which I pointed out in
'Informator')} 26. Bxc3 $1 {White's chances are rather better:} Rxc3 ({or} 
26... Bxc3 27. dxe6 Rc7 28. e7 Rxe7 29. Qxe7 Bxg2+ 30. Kg1 Bd4+ 31. Nf2 Bxf1
32. Kxf1 Qf3 33. Qe2 Qf4 34. Kg2) 27. f6 Bxd5 28. Nh6+ Kh8 29. fxg7+ Kxg7 30.
Qg4+ Kh8 31. Nxf7+ Rxf7 32. Rxf7 Bxg2+ 33. Qxg2 Qxg2+ 34. Kxg2 Rxd3 35. Rc1 Kg8
36. Rb7 {.}) (24. Nc4 Rc7 (24... Rc6 $5) ({the exchange sacrifice does not
promise full equality -} 24... Bxe4 25. Nb6 Bxd3 26. Qxd3 Qe4 27. Qxe4 Nxe4 28.
Nxc8 Rxc8 29. fxe6 fxe6 30. Rfc1 {etc.}) 25. e5 Nd5 (25... Ne4 26. Rbc1 $1) 26.
Nd6 a4 $1 {with the hope by accurate play of neutralising White's initiative})
(24. fxe6 fxe6 25. d5 ({against Stohl's move} 25. Nc4 {there is the adequate
reply} Rc7 $1) ({in 'The Test of Time' I recommended the pressurising} 25. Rf4
$5 {with the idea of} Bd6 {(Stohl)} ({or} 25... a4 26. Nc4) 26. Rh4 $1) 25...
exd5 26. Ng4 Nxg4 (26... Nxe4 $2 27. Nh6+) 27. Qxg4 Rc7 $1 (27... Rxf1+ $2 28.
Rxf1 Bc3 29. Bxc3 Rxc3 30. Qe6+ Kh8 31. Qe7 $1 Rc8 32. Rf7 dxe4 33. Bc4 $1 {
and wins}) 28. e5 {, and White has good compensation for the pawn, but after}
Qc8 29. e6 Ba6 $1 {nothing more is apparent. --- Thus it was possible to
calmly build up the pressure on Black's position. The impatient move in the
game allows him to repel the first wave of the attack.}) 24... exd5 {(3)} 25.
Ng4 Nxg4 {(4)} ({If} 25... Nxe4 $2 26. Bxe4 dxe4 {White would have won, not by
the 'Informator' line} 27. Nf6+ ({but by the accurate} 27. Nh6+ $1 Kh8 28.
Bxg7+ $1 Kxg7 29. f6+ Kxh6 (29... Kh8 30. Qg4) 30. Rf5 {with mate (Stohl)})
27... Kh8 28. Qh5 $2 ({it is not yet too late for} 28. Qg4 $1 Rc7 ({or} 28...
Ba3 29. Ba1 Rc7 30. Qh3 h6 31. Ne8 {and wins}) 29. Ne8) 28... h6 29. Ng4 {in
view of} f6 30. Nxf6 e3 $1 {.}) 26. Qxg4 f6 $1 {(3) To be honest, I
overlooked this obvious, only reply, when I played 24 d5.} ({Now the thematic} 
26... f6 27. e5 {encounters the simple reply} Bc3 $1 {, for example:} 28. e6
Bxb2 29. Rxb2 Ba6 {with a sound position. And in seeking a way to win, after a
long think I decided to go in for extreme measures.}) 27. Bxf6 $3 {(44) By
sacrificing the bishop, White clears the way for his pawns, which become
formidably strong. 'White's attack can now be parried only by accurate defence,
which is difficult to find. The bishop sacrifice changes the character and the
tempo of the play, and above all - the value of every move is sharply
increased. This, in view of Akesson's lack of time for thought (he had just 35
minutes left), was especially unpleasant for him.' (Nikitin)} Rxf6 28. e5 Rh6
$2 {(16) Black promptly makes a mistake, moving his rook to the wrong square.}
({The best defence was offered by} 28... Rf7 29. f6 Rcf8 $1 {. Here - both at
the board, and in later analysis - I have been able to 'calculate' only as far
as a draw (such is the price of the impetuous 24 d5 breakthrough):} 30. -- (30.
Rf3 Bc8 $1 (30... Kh8 $2 31. Rh3 gxf6 32. Qg6 $1 {and wins}) ({it is also less
good to play} 30... d4 31. Rg3 $1 g6 32. Bxg6) ({or} 30... Qc8 31. Bf5 Qc4 32.
Bxh7+ $1 Kxh7 33. Qh5+ Kg8 34. Rh3 Rxf6 35. Qh7+ Kf7 36. exf6 Ke8 37. Qxg7 Qe4
38. Rc1 d4 39. Rh4 $1 {, etc.}) 31. Qg5 $1 Qa7 $1 (31... Be6 32. Rg3 g6 {is
good enough for a draw}) ({as is} 31... Kh8 32. Rxb4 $1 gxf6 $1 33. Qh6 axb4
34. Bxh7 Bg4 $3 35. Rxf6 $1 Bh5 $1) 32. Rbf1 $1 {, and White has good
compensation for the piece:} -- (32... g6 33. Qh6 Rd8 ({not} 33... Be6 34. Rg3
Kh8 $6 35. Bxg6 Rd7 {(c7)} 36. h3 $1) ({or} 33... Kh8 34. Bxg6 Rg8 35. Bxf7
Qxf7 36. Qe3 $1 {and the rook and pawn are at least as strong as the two
bishops}) 34. Bxg6 Bf8 35. Bxf7+ Qxf7 {(Petrosian)} 36. Qd2 $1 {.}) ({. If} 
32... Be6) ({, or} 32... Qd4 {there is the drawing combination} 33. fxg7 Rxg7
34. Rxf8+ Bxf8 35. Rxf8+ $1 Kxf8 36. Qd8+ {.}) (32... Qc7 33. Rc1 $1 ({but not
immediately} 33. Rf4 $2 g6 $1 34. Rh4 Be6 $1 35. h3 Kh8) 33... Qb7 34. Rf4 $1
Kh8 (34... g6 35. Rh4) 35. fxg7+ Rxg7 36. Rxf8+ Bxf8 37. Qd8 Rf7 38. Qxc8 Qxc8
39. Rxc8 {with a roughly equal endgame})) (30. Rf4 $1 {, a discovery by
Nikitin.} -- ({. Now} 30... Bc8 $2 {loses to} 31. Bxh7+ $1 Kxh7 32. Qh5+ Kg8
33. Rh4 {.}) ({. This threat relieves White of any risk, for example:} 30... d4
31. Rbf1 $1 (31. Rg1 {is also possible}) ({or else the immediate} 31. Bxh7+
Kxh7 32. Qh5+ Kg8 33. Rh4 {with a draw}) 31... Kh8 32. Bxh7 Bxg2+ 33. Kg1 Bxf1
34. Be4 $1 Qxe4 35. Rxe4 gxf6 36. Kxf1 fxe5+ 37. Ke2 {, and the black king is
in danger}) (30... Qc8 31. Bf5 $1 Qc7 32. Bxh7+ Kxh7 33. Qh5+ Kg8 34. Rh4 $1
Rxf6 35. Qh7+ Kf7 36. exf6 Kxf6 37. Rhxb4 $1 axb4 38. Rf1+ Ke5 $1 39. Qh5+ $1
Kd4 ({or} 39... Kd6 40. Qg6+ $1 Kc5 41. Rxf8) 40. Qd1+ Kc5 41. Rxf8 {,
remaining with the exchange for a pawn}) (30... Bd2 $5 31. Bxh7+ ({or the more
cunning} 31. Qh3 $5 h6 32. Qg3 $1 Ba6 $1 33. Bf5 ({not Nikitin's move} 33. Rg4
{(?) because of} Bg5 $1 34. Bg6 Rb7) 33... Bc8 $1 34. Bd3 {with a draw}) 31...
Kxh7 32. Qh3+ $1 Kg8 33. fxg7 $1 ({Nikitin gives only} 33. Rh4 $2 Bh6 {when
Black wins}) 33... Rxg7 (33... Rxf4 34. Qh8+ {and gxf8Q+}) 34. Rh4 $1 Kf7 $1
35. Qd7+ Kg8 36. Qh3 {with a draw.})) ({. The direct} 30. Bxh7+ $2 Kxh7 31. Rf5
{is weak in view of} Bd2 $1 {. --- Of course, many of the given variations are
difficult to calculate (especially in time-trouble), and the move 28...Rh6? is
easy to explain. 'Akesson decided to conduct the defence on the basis of
common sense: in the first instance he defended his h7-point (and in some
cases, after e5-e6 and ...Qb8, Black can gain a tempo by threatening mate on
h2). I think that this would have been played by the majority of players, not
possessing a heightened sense of danger' (Nikitin). But my opponent
underestimated the consequences of the breakthrough by the white pawns.})) 29.
f6 Rc7 (29... Bf8 $6 30. e6 $1 Qb8 31. h3 {and wins.}) 30. e6 $1 {(4)} ({With
the seemingly tempting} 30. Rbc1 $2 {White would have lost his entire
advantage:} Rf7 $1 (30... Qd8) ({or} 30... Qb8 {is also not bad}) 31. Bf5 ({or
} 31. Qe6 Qb8 32. Bb5 Be7 $1) 31... d4 $1 32. Rf2 Kh8 {.}) 30... Qd8 $1 {(13) 
After using almost all of his remaining time, Akesson found the only way of
parrying the direct threats - by giving up his rook for the two dangerous
pawns.} ({Other moves would quickly have led to a spectacular rout:} 30... Qf8
$2 31. f7+ Kh8 32. Rxb4 $1 axb4 33. Qxb4 $1 {with a quick mate}) (30... Qb8 31.
Qg3 $1 {(threatening e6-e7)} Bd6 32. Qxd6 Rxf6 33. Bb5 $1 {(Stohl), and the
e-pawn decides matters}) (30... Kh8 31. Qg3 $1 d4 ({avoiding the mate after} 
31... Qc8 32. Rbc1 $1 Bd6 33. fxg7+ Kg8 34. Qxd6 {- Stohl}) 32. Qxc7 Bxg2+ 33.
Kg1 gxf6 34. e7 Qg8 35. e8=Q Qxe8 36. Kxg2 {with an extra rook}) (30... Bc6 31.
e7 Rxe7 32. fxe7 Bxe7 33. Qf5 $1 Kh8 (33... Bd6 34. Rbc1 $1 Rxh2+ 35. Kg1 Rh6
36. g3 $1) 34. Rf3 $1 Qe8 35. Qe5 $1 Bd6 36. Qxe8+ Bxe8 37. Rb8 Re6 38. Rd8 {
and Bb5, picking up the bishop.}) 31. e7 {(3)} Rxe7 32. fxe7 Qxe7 33. Rbc1 $1 {
Not allowing the opponent any respite, especially with him being in
time-trouble. The threat is Rc8+. --- The last critical position: is Black
able to save himself?} Qd8 $2 {(3) Now, however, things do not get as far as
an endgame.} ({Other 'simple' defences against the deadly check would also
have failed:} 33... Bc6 $2 34. Qc8+ Be8 35. Bb5 Re6 36. Rc7) ({or} 33... Rc6 $2
34. Rxc6 Bxc6 35. Qh5 g6 36. Bxg6 {etc.}) (33... Rd6 {would also not have
helped:} 34. Qf4 $1 g6 (34... g5 35. Qf5 $1) 35. Bb5 $1 {(threatening Rc7 or
Rce1)} g5 36. Qg3 {and wins (Stohl).}) ({With his flag about to all, Akesson
failed to find the best reply} 33... Qe6 $1 {, leading to an endgame
favourable for White:} 34. Qxe6+ $1 ({after} 34. Bf5 $2 Qe5 35. h3 Bd6 {the
initiative is now with Black}) 34... Rxe6 35. Rc7 Re7 {, and here instead of
my previous variation} 36. Rxe7 ({White has the much stronger} 36. Rfc1 $1 Kf7
$1 37. Rxe7+ Bxe7 38. Rc7 Ba8 39. Bxh7 {(Stohl)} Ke6 ({after} 39... a4 $2 40.
Rc8 $1 Bb7 41. Bg8+ Kf6 42. Rb8 {Black loses his bishop}) 40. Ra7 Bc6 41. Rxa5
{with a technically won position}) 36... Bxe7 37. Bxh7+ Kxh7 38. Rf7 Bb4 39.
Rxb7 d4 40. Rd7 Bc3 41. Kg1 {, which is not altogether clear in view of} Bb2 $1
{(intending ...a5-a4-a3)} 42. Ra7 Bc3 {intending ...d4-d3-d2.}) 34. Qf5 $1 Qb8
({Avoiding the spectacular} 34... Bd6 35. Qf7+ Kh8 36. h3 $1 (36. Qxb7 Rxh2+
37. Kg1 Rh1+ $1 {is not so clear - Stohl}) 36... Bc8 37. Rc7 $1 {.}) 35. Qf7+
Kh8 36. Rc7 {. Times: 1.43-2.29. --- A fighting game! Nikitin: 'A genuine
victory for indomitable mind over matter. Already then by no means every
grandmaster could withstand the pressure of the young Kasparov. The two
players displayed exceptional ingenuity and produced a highly complicated
chess creation. The brilliance and freshness of their ideas were so attractive,
that Garry several times returned to an analysis of the mind-boggling events
which occurred on the board. Among those who took part in the analytical
searches were Petrosian and young candidate masters from the school I ran with
him. I also spent many hours trying to understand the intricate turning-points
of this wonderful chess spectacle.' --- After this win I at last took the sole
lead in the tournament - 5½ out of 6, a point ahead of my three closest
pursuers. Among them was the ambitious Tempone, with whom I was paired with
Black in the next round (see the following game).} 1-0

[Event "44: World Junior Championship, Dortmund"]
[Site "?"]
[Date "1980.08.23"]
[Round "7"]
[White "Tempone, M."]
[Black "Kasparov, G."]
[Result "0-1"]
[ECO "A38"]
[Annotator "Garry Kasparov"]
[PlyCount "86"]
[EventDate "1980.??.??"]
[Source "Everyman Chess"]
[SourceDate "2012.11.28"]

1. Nf3 Nf6 2. g3 (2. b3 g6 3. Bb2 Bg7 4. c4 {- Game No.26.}) 2... g6 3. b3 ({
In my youth I often encountered this 'venomous' set-up - my opponents also
played} 3. Bg2 Bg7 4. O-O O-O 5. b3 d6 6. d4 e5 ({instead of} 6... c5 7. Bb2
Nc6 8. d5 {, Nikolaevsky-Kasparov, Baku 1976}) 7. dxe5 dxe5 8. Bb2 e4 9. Ng5
Bf5 {with equality (Kappe-Kasparov, Cagnes-sur-Mer 1977).}) 3... Bg7 4. Bb2 (4.
Bb2 {here theory promised Black equality after} d6 {and then at a convenient
moment ...e7-e5, but my experience had shown that all was not so simple: in my
game with Yusupov (Leningrad 1977) after} 5. d4 O-O 6. Bg2 e5 7. dxe5 Nfd7 8.
Nc3 Nxe5 9. Nxe5 Bxe5 10. O-O Nc6 11. Rb1 Be6 12. Qd2 Re8 13. Nd5 {I
definitely suffered. Therefore I devised and began employing another
development set-up, which proved to be quite a good rejoinder to the 'double
fianchetto'.}) 4... c5 {(7) With the intention of creating a strong centre by
5...d5. White prevents this.} ({If immediately} 4... d5 {, then} 5. c4 $1 {.})
5. c4 d6 6. Bg2 {(2) The attempt also to prevent 6...e5, restricting the
bishop on b2, is dubious;} ({after} 6. d4 $6 {Black has the unpleasant} Ne4 $1
{, for example:} 7. -- (7. Bg2 Qa5+ 8. Nfd2 Nxd2 9. Bc3 {, and here not the
dubious queen sacrifice} Nxb3 $6 ({but} 9... Qb6 $1 {(a move of the 1990s)} 10.
dxc5 Nxb1 $1 11. Bxg7 Qb4+ 12. Kf1 Rg8 13. Bb2 (13. Bh6 Na3 $1) 13... Nd2+ 14.
Kg1 Nxc4 15. Qd4 Na6 $1) 10. Bxa5 Nxa5 {(Psakhis-Magerramov, Baku 1978)}) ({.
Or} 7. Qc1 Qa5+ 8. Nbd2 Nxd2 ({but} 8... O-O $5 {deserves consideration}) 9.
Qxd2 Qxd2+ 10. Kxd2 Nc6 11. e3 Bg4 12. Be2 {, and White holds on 
(Korchnoi-Kasparov, Paris (blitz) 1990).}) (7. Nfd2 $6 Ng5 $1 {.})) 6... e5 7.
O-O Nc6 8. Nc3 O-O {(two of my earlier games also reached this position)} 9. d3
{(2)} ({In the event of} 9. e3 Bf5 $1 10. d4 $6 (10. d3 $1 {is better}) 10...
e4 $1 11. Ng5 Re8 12. dxc5 dxc5 13. Nb5 Re7 $1 {Black has a promising position
(Webb-Kasparov, Skara 1980).}) 9... Ne8 $5 {(2) An important link in the plan.
The knight is better placed at c7 than at f6: it clears the way for the f-pawn,
without losing control of the d5-point.} (9... Nh5 $6 10. Nd2 {is less good
for Black (Petrosian-Portisch, 9th match game, Palma de Mallorca 1974).}) 10.
Nd2 {(3)} (10. Qd2 Nc7 11. Ne1 Be6 12. Nd5 Qd7 13. e3 Rab8 {with equality 
(Kharitonov-Kasparov, Moscow 1977). Tempone chooses a similar course, but is
unable to control comfortably the d5-point.}) 10... Nc7 {(5)} 11. e3 $6 {(13) 
An inaccuracy.} ({The immediate} 11. Nd5 {is better (Gipslis-Ftacnik, Tallinn
1981)} Bg4 $5) ({or} 11. a3 {, trying to provoke either the weakening} a5 {
(Cvitan-Gallagher, Geneva 1994)} ({, or} 11... Be6 $6 12. b4 ({instead of} 12.
Nd5 Qd7 {with equality}) 12... cxb4 13. axb4 Nxb4 14. Bxb7 {with the initiative
}) ({, and therefore} 11... Bg4 $1 12. h3 Be6 {is correct.})) 11... Be6 {(3)}
12. Rc1 {(28)} ({White is forced to prevent the freeing advance ...d6-d5 in
this artificial way: if} 12. Nd5 $2 {, then} Bxd5 13. cxd5 Nb4 {, winning a
pawn.}) 12... Qd7 {(5)} 13. Re1 {(2) Not an essential move - White values his
g2-bishop too highly.} ({He should have considered, for instance,} 13. Nde4 h6
14. f4 exf4 15. gxf4 f5 16. Nf2 {(g3), although here too Black has a
comfortable game.}) 13... Rad8 {(25) In choosing from several attractive
continuations, I decided in the first instance to complete my mobilisation and
intensify the threat of ...d6-d5.} 14. Nde4 {(10) White is already in some
difficulties.} ({It is obvious that the variation} 14. a3 d5 15. cxd5 Nxd5 16.
Nxd5 $6 ({the lesser evil is} 16. Nce4 b6) 16... Bxd5 17. Rxc5 (17. Ne4 $6 b6 {
and ...f7-f5}) 17... Bxg2 18. Kxg2 Qxd3 {cannot satisfy him.}) 14... h6 {(2)}
15. f4 f5 {(6)} 16. Nf2 exf4 {(2)} 17. gxf4 {One of the critical positions in
the game.} Qf7 $6 {By beginning preparations for ...g6-g5, Black deviates from
the correct course - play in the centre.} ({Nothing was promised either by the
immediate} 17... d5 {in view of} 18. cxd5 Nxd5 19. Nxd5 Bxb2 20. Rxc5 Ba3 21.
b4 $1 Nxb4 22. Rc7 $1 ({my earlier recommendation} 22. Ra5 {is less good
because of} Nxd5 23. Rxa3 b6) 22... Qd6 23. Qa1 $1 Rd7 24. Rxd7 Bxd7 25. Qe5 {
with equality}) ({or by the immediate} 17... g5 18. Qd2 $1 ({the exchange} 18.
fxg5 hxg5 {would increase White's problems.})) ({However, the prophylactic} 
17... b6 $1 {would have given Black very promising play, for example:} 18. Qd2
d5 19. cxd5 (19. Ne2 Rfe8 ({or} 19... d4 $1)) 19... Nxd5 20. Nxd5 Bxd5 21. Bxg7
Qxg7 22. Bxd5+ Rxd5 {, intending ...g6-g5.}) 18. Qd2 g5 {(2) It was safer to
'stand still'. Underestimating the opponent's possibilities, I made a series
of routine and largely weak moves (perhaps the psychological tiredness told
after the difficult game with Akesson), and step by step the situation changed
in White's favour.} 19. Ne2 {(2)} (19. d4 {looks more energetic, and if} d5 {
, then} 20. cxd5 Nxd5 21. fxg5 hxg5 22. Nh3 $1 cxd4 23. exd4 {, emphasising
what a risky venture ...g6-g5 was. But Tempone preferred to take control of
the f4-point and exchange the dark-square bishops. After consolidating in the
centre, White has achieved a flexible position. Now the opening of the
kingside may rebound on Black: his king's defences are less secure.}) 19... d5
{(18) Black does not sense the danger, although he already needs to be
cautious.} ({Thus after the 'Informator' suggestion} 19... Ne8 $6 {White has
the awkward} 20. d4 $1 {.}) ({If I had been aiming only for a draw, I would
possibly have played} 19... Bxb2 20. Qxb2 Qg7 {.}) 20. Bxg7 {(6)} Qxg7 21. Kh1
{(4) Here I at last examined the situation critically, and I drew some painful
conclusions.} ({It is sensible to avoid the complications after} 21. cxd5 $6
Bxd5 22. fxg5 ({or} 22. Rxc5 Bxg2 23. Kxg2 gxf4+ 24. Kh1 Qe7) 22... Ne5 $1 {.})
({In 'Informator' and then in 'The Test of Time' I recommended} 21. Ng3 {with
the cooperative variation} gxf4 {(?)} ({but after the calm} 21... b6 {there is
nothing terrible for Black}) 22. Nh5 fxe3 {(?)} 23. Rxe3 {and wins.}) 21...
dxc4 $6 {(20) It seemed to me that, because of the poor placing of his pieces
and the vulnerability of his centre, Black's position was already difficult,
and after prolonged thought I decided that the course of events could only be
changed by the rapid return of the knight to f6. To carry out this idea I was
forced to weaken my queenside and concede the centre, but I considered that
the creation of counterplay on the kingside (instead of temporising, and
manoeuvring) was the most important task.} ({Meanwhile, both} 21... b6) ({and} 
21... Qe7) ({or perhaps even} 21... Kh8 $5 {(} 22. fxg5 hxg5 23. cxd5 Bxd5 24.
Rxc5 Bxg2+ 25. Kxg2 Ne6 {with counterplay worth a pawn) would still have
enabled Black to maintain approximate equality.}) 22. bxc4 Ne8 $6 {From f6 the
knight will take control of the central squares, forestall the unpleasant
manoeuvre Ng3-h5 - and take part in the spectacular finish to the game!} ({But
the patient} 22... Rd6 23. Rg1 g4 {was objectively better}) ({or even} 22...
Bc8 23. Bxc6 (23. Rg1 Qf6) 23... bxc6 24. Ng1 Ne6 25. Nf3 Kh7 26. Rg1 Qf6 {and
...Rg8, although I did not like the 'brittle nature' of Black's pawn structure
and this all looked rather suspicious.}) 23. Qc3 $6 {(4)} ({The unexpected} 23.
fxg5 $1 hxg5 24. Nf4 $1 {was far stronger, for example:} Bd7 (24... gxf4 $6 25.
Bxc6 $1 Kf7 $1 26. exf4 $1 bxc6 27. Nh3 {with a powerful attack}) 25. Bd5+ Kh7
(25... Kh8 26. Rg1 Nf6 27. Rg3 ({or} 27. Qb2 $5)) 26. Rg1 {with the initiative:
} Nf6 ({or} 26... Nc7 27. Rg3 g4 28. h3) 27. h4 $1 g4 28. N2h3 {.}) 23... Nf6 {
(6)} ({I was continuing to play for a win, and I did not even contemplate the
depressing} 23... Qxc3 24. Rxc3 Bd7 25. d4 $1 {.}) 24. d4 {(4) White does not
stand still - his chances are now better, and energetic measures are required
of Black to create counterplay.} Bc8 ({Previously I suggested} 24... Ne7 {(?!)}
25. -- ({, with the idea of} 25. Bxb7 Ned5 $1 26. Bxd5 Nxd5 27. cxd5 $2 ({but
after} 27. Qd3 $1 {Black still has to demonstrate that he has sufficient
compensation for the pawn}) 27... Bxd5+ 28. e4 fxe4 {and wins}) ({. Moreover,
in the variation} 25. d5 {(25 Qa3!?)} Bc8 {(?!)} 26. Qa3 Ng6 {I considered only
} 27. Qxc5 {(?)} ({although after} 27. Qxa7 $1 {White is a sound pawn to the
good}) 27... Nh4 28. Rg1 b6 29. Qd4 ({or} 29. Qb4 Rde8 {'with fair
counter-chances'}) 29... b5 $1)) ({The computer insistently recommends} 24...
Nb4 25. Ra1 (25. Qd2 $5) 25... Bc8 26. a3 Na6 {, but it is hard for a human
player to play his knight to such a 'bad' square, especially as after} 27. d5 (
{or} 27. Nd3 {all the same Black does not have equality.})) 25. Rcd1 $2 {(10) 
Losing the greater part of his advantage.} ({I thought that the strongest was} 
25. dxc5 {(?!) with the idea of} Ne7 ({or} 25... Nd7 26. Qa3 Qe7 27. Nd3) ({
but after} 25... Qe7 $1 26. Nd4 Qxc5 {Black would have extricated himself:} 27.
Nd3 Qa5 28. Nxc6 Qxc3 29. Rxc3 bxc6 30. Bxc6 Ne4 $1 31. Bxe4 fxe4 32. Ne5 Rd2
33. Ra3 Rfd8 {with equality}) 26. Rcd1 Ng6 27. Rd6 $1) ({Therefore} 25. d5 $1 {
was correct:} Nb4 (25... Ne7 $6 26. Qa5 Ng6 27. Qxa7 {can hardly be correct})
26. Qb3 {with the better prospects. --- However, Tempone did not want to part
with his fine 'hanging' centre and, after making his move, he unexpectedly
offered a draw. I stopped to think and while realising that for the moment
Black had no real grounds for optimism, I nevertheless decided to take a risk.}
) 25... cxd4 {(7)} 26. exd4 {(2)} ({It was this natural move that I was
counting on, assuming that} 26. Nxd4 {would have been better for White.
However, even here after} Nxd4 27. exd4 Rfe8 {he does not have anything at all
serious. --- By taking with the pawn, Tempone was hoping for d4-d5 followed by
Nd4, when Black does not have even have a hint of any counterplay. But at this
moment my opponent's pleasant thoughts were interrupted by a manoeuvre which
abruptly changed the evaluation of the position.}) 26... Ne7 $1 {The most
interesting stage begins. The manoeuvre of the knight to h4 may cause White
serious problems: one of his most important pieces - the bishop on g2 - will
be under attack.} 27. d5 {(8)} ({Prophylactic measures (such as} 27. Qc1 $1 {
, hindering ...Ng6) should have been considered, but Tempone does not display
any signs of disquiet.}) 27... Ng6 28. Nd3 $6 {(8) White is already finding
some difficulty in choosing his moves.} ({The black pawns would have become
dangerously active in the event of} 28. fxg5 hxg5 29. d6 (29. Nh3 $2 Qh6 $1)
29... f4 30. c5 Rde8 31. Nd4 g4 {.}) ({But if Tempone had foreseen the coming
events he would probably have played} 28. a4 {.}) 28... Nh4 {The black knights
are positioned menacingly close to the white king's residence, and Black only
needs to bring into play his last reserve - the bishop on c8.} 29. Rg1 $2 {Not
an obvious mistake, but apparently the decisive one.} (29. Nd4) ({or} 29. Rb1 {
was essential, although in both cases after} Rfe8 {the initiative is with
Black.}) 29... b5 $1 {The triumph of Black's plan! The white centre collapses,
and Black's minor pieces, which for a long time were huddled together in their
own camp, become fearfully strong.} 30. Ne5 {(4)} (30. cxb5 {was hardly any
more resilient:} Nxg2 (30... Rfe8 $5) 31. Rxg2 Nxd5 32. Qxg7+ (32. Qb3 Be6 $1)
32... Kxg7 33. Rg3 (33. Nc5 Ne3) 33... Rfe8 34. Ne5 Bb7 35. Nc6 Nc7 $1 36. Rxd8
Rxd8 37. a4 Rd2 {with a won ending.}) 30... bxc4 {(2)} 31. Qxc4 Bb7 {(9)} 32.
d6+ {(9) Equivalent to capitulation, but what else was there?} (32. Nd4 {is
bad:} Nxg2 33. Nxf5 Qh7 $1 34. Nxh6+ Kh8 $1 35. Rxg2 Rxd5 {and wins.}) ({White
would also have lost, although not so quickly, after} 32. Qb3 Kh8) ({or} 32.
Nc3 Rc8 33. Qb3 Kh8 {.}) 32... Kh7 {(3)} (32... Kh8 $5 {was tempting, since if}
33. Bxb7 Qxb7+ 34. Qc6 {there was the spectacular zwischenzug} Ne4 $1 {. Here}
35. Rge1 {seemed unclear to me, but after} Qg7 $1 {White would have been
unable to save the game:} 36. Qc7 Nf2+ 37. Kg1 Nxd1 38. Qxg7+ Kxg7 39. Rxd1
Rfe8 {(f6) etc.}) 33. Bxb7 Qxb7+ 34. Qc6 Qxc6+ 35. Nxc6 Ne4 $1 {By creating a
rare mating construction, Black picks up the d6-pawn.} 36. Rgf1 ({The last
chance was} 36. Rge1 $5 -- ({, this would have justified itself after} 36...
Rc8 $2 37. Ned4 $1 ({but not the earlier suggestion} 37. d7 $2 Rxc6 38. d8=Q
Rxd8 39. Rxd8 Rc2 $1 40. Nd4 Rg2 $1 {and wins}) 37... Nf2+ (37... Nxd6 $2 38.
Ne6 $1) 38. Kg1 Nxd1 39. Rxd1 Nf3+ 40. Nxf3 Rxc6 41. Ne5 {, and the d-pawn
will cost the rook}) ({, or} 36... Nf2+ $6 {(for the moment there is no need
to exchange such a powerful knight for the passive rook)} 37. Kg1 Nxd1 38. Rxd1
) ({, but after} 36... Rxd6 $1 37. Rxd6 Nxd6 38. Ned4 Ne4 ({or} 38... Rf7 {
Black would have retained an obvious advantage.}))) 36... Rxd6 ({(here too} 
36... Rc8 $2 {was weak:} 37. Ned4 $1 Nxd6 38. Ne6 {)}) 37. Rxd6 Nxd6 38. fxg5
hxg5 39. Rd1 Re8 $1 {A pretty rook manoeuvre. The retreat of the knight would
have given White some chances, but Black does not even think of moving it, and
he continues his attack.} 40. Ned4 Re3 $1 41. Kg1 {(3)} Ne4 {The black pieces 
(especially the knights!) have taken up dominating positions, and have created
an unusual cage around the white king. Now the win is achieved either by
transferring the rook to the 2nd rank, or by advancing the f- and g-pawns.} 42.
Rb1 {(9)} Rd3 {(2)} 43. a4 Rd2 {. Times: 2.35-2.19. --- After beating Tempone
I reached 6½ out of 7 and stretched my lead to one and a half points.
Although there was still nearly half of the tournament to come, the destiny of
first place was practically decided. --- The only player not to reconcile
himself to this was Akesson: in the 8th and 9th rounds he scored two wins and
reduced the gap to the minimum, since I made two draws. But in the 10th and
11th rounds our paths conclusively diverged: Ralf faded, losing to Short and
Morovic, whereas I crushed Hjorth and won a textbook ending against Danailov.
--- At the end I made two more draws and finished first, one and a half points
ahead of the silver medal winner Short. Five years later Nigel said that he
still remembered the impression that I made on him across the board (we played
a draw in the 9th round): 'I have never faced such an intense player, never
felt such energy and concentration, such will and desire to win burning across
the board from me.'} (43... -- {Incidentally, in our preparations for the
tournament my trainers and I considered Short to be one of my main rivals and
we carefully analysed his games. At the age of 12 Nigel became the
youngest-ever participant in the adult British Championship, at 14 he shared
1st-3rd places in it, and then also 1st-2nd places in the World Cadet
Championship (conceding the title to Tempone only on the tie-break). Some
English chess commentators even predicted that the then youngest international
master would be a future adult world champion. In Dortmund, initially Short
was pretty lucky on a couple of occasions, but then he warmed up and showed
that he did indeed possess great chess potential. --- Bykhovsky: 'Before the
championship it was said that Kasparov should not take part in it, since the
player from Baku was obviously stronger than his opponents. Now it can
definitely be said (and Garik himself is of the same opinion) that the
tournament was useful for him. And it is not just that Kasparov's name has now
joined the ranks of the "chess princes". It was important to rid himself of
the complex arising from his not so successful performances in the world cadet
championships. Those failures are now not so bitter. In the creative respect
too the tournament was instructive - Kasparov's strengths became clearer, and
deficiencies came to light, on the elimination of which he needs to work. The
young grandmaster has all the attributes to be one of the top chess players in
the world: talent, capacity for work, and sense of purpose. But for great
victories you also need strength of character. Whether Garik can develop this
will be decided in the next few years.' --- Nikitin: 'Kasparov's superiority
was enormous. At times it appeared that he was playing a different kind of
chess, of which his contemporaries were not yet capable. The chess world
realised that the new chess prince was on course for the chess summit. At the
time grandmaster Hort wrote: "Of the well-known players, the only one who can
realistically threaten Karpov is Kasparov, and that within a few years when he
gains experience of participating in top-level international events." To
questions about his long-term plans, Garry himself would avoid these with
pre-determined protestations that he only planned one year ahead.'}) (43... --
{And, indeed, in one of the interviews in September 1980, to the question 'do
you believe that at some point you will contest a match for the world crown
with Anatoly Karpov - in a match which the world is awaiting?', I replied as
follows: 'Alas, such a possibility lies beyond the range of my foresight.
Serious obsessions rarely come true. Let us see how things go, how
circumstances turn out. Too many obstacles still need to be overcome, and
besides my play depends on a mass of factors - form, mood and the weather. In
a couple of years, if all goes well in the Interzonal, it will be worth
returning to this question.' --- I was also asked if I would play in the
following world junior championships. I replied: 'It is tempting to play once
more and, if I am successful, to become the first two-times champion. But I
think that this tournament was my last one in junior chess. I don't want to
give up, but it would appear that this stage has come to an end...' --- Now I
was the chess prince! I was overjoyed. My relatives and trainers were happy,
as were my school teachers and my former class-mates. It is probable that
Botvinnik was also happy, although he was terribly angry that I had disobeyed
him, and for a time we weren't even on speaking terms. But then my mother had
a word with his wife Gayane Davidovna, and relations gradually returned to
normal.}) 0-1

[Event "?"]
[Site "?"]
[Date "????.??.??"]
[Round "?"]
[White "Olympiad Debut"]
[Black "?"]
[Result "*"]
[Annotator "Garry Kasparov"]
[PlyCount "1"]
[EventDate "1984.??.??"]
[SourceDate "2009.12.07"]

{24th World Chess Olympiad (Malta, 20th November-7th December 1980): 1. USSR
and 2. Hungary - 39 out of 56; 3. Yugoslavia - 35; 4. USA - 34; 5.
Czechoslovakia - 33; 6-7. Poland and England - 32½; etc. (altogether - 82
teams). This difficult Olympiad gold was procured by Karpov (9/12),
Polugayevsky (3/7), Tal (3½/6), Geller (6½/9), reserves Balashov (7½/10)
and Kasparov (9½/12).} 1. -- {That remarkable 'gold' year concluded for me
with the Olympiad in Malta, the first in my career. 'Which of our grandmasters
does not dream of becoming one of the cherished six Olympiad players!' I
declared two months before this in an interview. --- Nikitin: 'The place
allotted to the novice in the country's main team was the most modest one, but
the youngster was happy and proud. Before this so important appearance, for
the first time we were able to hold a training session in a government
sanatorium in Zagulba - a small resort 40 km from Baku. Starting from that
time, for ten years Zagulba became Kasparov's training base. The wonderful
sandy beaches of the Caspian Sea, the shady avenues in the parks, the general
stillness - all this helped us to prepare for the most serious chess battles.'
--- This is from the notebook of Rimma Bilunova, the trainer of the USSR
women's team (she was entrusted with looking after the youngest players - Maya
Chiburdanidze and me): 'Rome, en route to Malta, 16th November. The most
interesting member of our team is, of course, Garik Kasparov. For all his
chess virtues, he is also a very interesting person. You only need to excite
him a little, and he pours forth poetry, stories, and interesting lectures on
the most varied topics. For the women's team he is the general favourite,
entertainer and saviour during the tiresome bustle of travelling. Today I
would define his essence as follows: passion itself, in the very best sense of
the word. Also interesting are Maya Chiburdanidze and the beauty Nana
Alexandria, and the matron-like Nona Gaprindashvili, but Garik is our treasure,
our sparkle, our joy. The other members of the men's and women's teams are
just people. But during these two days, for me Garik has proved even more
striking than Rome, the Vatican and the Coliseum.'} (1. -- {Malta is a
beautiful island, of course, but playing there was very difficult: apart from
the weight of responsibility, I was also oppressed by the unusual living
conditions. For instance, to have dinner you had to stand in a queue for
something like an hour and a half. We played in the old castle of the Maltese
Order, in a gallery 200 meters long by 14 meters wide, along which were
arranged the chess tables, with a narrow corridor in the middle for spectators
(who by no means always kept quiet). The rounds, and there were 14 of them,
took place from 15.00 to 20.00, with adjournments from 22.00 to 24.00 and, if
necessary, the following morning. --- The main intrigue of the men's Olympiad
was whether the strong Hungarian team would repeat its sensational success of
two years earlier, when it displaced the invariable champions - the USSR team
- from the top of the pedestal. True, on that occasion Karpov and Tal, resting
after the exhausting match in Baguio, were not playing... Now they were, as
well as two 'dark horses' - debutants Balashov and Kasparov. Of course, we
both did our utmost to justify the hopes placed in us, especially since not
all the team was in good form and the tournament race proved exceptionally
difficult.}) (1. -- {For the starting match with Venezuela the Soviet team
fielded its main line-up - Karpov, Polugayevsky, Tal and Geller. It is
incredible, but true: this stellar quartet achieved only a 2½-1½ score 
(Karpov won). But the Hungarians crushed the Scots 4-0, and a further 18
matches ended this way! From the 2nd round Balashov and I successfully joined
the battle, and our team confidently defeated the Greeks and the Austrians 
(both 3½-½). However, the Hungarians also did not slow down, overcoming
the Norwegians (3½-½) and the Swedes (3-1). --- In the 4th round the USSR
team met the Yugoslavs, who were always among the contenders for the medals.
Our opponents did their utmost not to lose the match - and they achieved three
draws, but they were unable to implement their plan in full.}) *

[Event "45: World Chess Olympiad, Malta"]
[Site "?"]
[Date "1980.11.23"]
[Round "4"]
[White "Kasparov, G."]
[Black "Marjanovic, S."]
[Result "1-0"]
[ECO "E17"]
[Annotator "Garry Kasparov"]
[PlyCount "45"]
[EventDate "1980.??.??"]
[Source "Everyman Chess"]
[SourceDate "2012.11.28"]

1. d4 Nf6 2. c4 e6 3. Nf3 b6 4. g3 {(6)} ({As I have already said, at that
time I had a temporary crisis in the} 4. a3 {variation, and I began adopting 4
g3 (which came in useful later in my matches with Karpov).}) 4... Bb7 5. Bg2
Be7 6. O-O (6. Nc3 Ne4 7. Bd2 {- Game No.46.}) 6... O-O 7. d5 $5 {(2) A pawn
sacrifice, which came into fashion three months before the Olympiad - after
Polugayevsky's fine win in the 12th game of his Candidates match with Korchnoi
(1980).} ({The usual} 7. Nc3 Ne4 {is far more modest.}) 7... exd5 8. Nh4 $1 {
A fresh idea, leading to sharp positions, in which the character of the play
was to my liking and seemed favourable for White.} ({The earlier move} 8. Nd4 {
went out of use after} Bc6 $1 9. cxd5 Bxd5 {(Polugayevsky-Korchnoi, 8th match
game, Buenos Aires 1980).}) 8... c6 ({In the event of} 8... Ne4 9. cxd5 Nd6 ({
or} 9... Bxh4 10. Bxe4 Bf6 11. Qc2 {(Gheorghiu-Unzicker, Wijk aan Zee 1981)
White retains somewhat the better chances}) 10. Nf3 {(as in the source game
Guimard-Pilnik, La Plata 1944).}) 9. cxd5 Nxd5 ({If} 9... cxd5 {, then} 10. Nc3
Na6 11. Nf5 Nc7 12. Bf4 {with some advantage (Beliavsky-Spassky, Baden 1980).})
10. Nf5 Nc7 {(2) A sound reply.} ({The sensational Polugayevsky-Korchnoi game
went} 10... Bc5 $6 11. e4 Ne7 ({Black still has problems after} 11... Qf6 12.
Nxg7 Kxg7 13. exd5 Ba6 14. Bd2 $1 {, Dorfman-G.Kuzmin, Tashkent 1980}) 12. Nxg7
$1 Kxg7 13. b4 Bxb4 14. Qd4+ f6 15. Qxb4 {, and White scored a spectacular win
(Game No.27 in Volume III of 'My Great Predecessors').}) ({And after} 10... Nf6
11. e4 d5 12. Nc3 dxe4 {(Polugayevsky-Stean, Olympiad, Malta 1980)} 13. Nxe4 $1
{with the threat of Bg5 is good.}) 11. Nc3 (11. e4 d5 ({and} 11... d6 {seemed
better to me, and therefore I considered 11 Nc3 to be more accurate (as played
by Sveshnikov - cf. the following note)}) 12. Re1 {is currently popular.})
11... d5 {(6)} ({White is better after} 11... d6 12. Bf4 Ne8 13. Qd2 Na6 14.
Rfd1 {(Sveshnikov-Platonov, Tashkent 1980)}) ({or} 11... Ne8 12. Bf4 Na6 13.
Qd2 d5 (13... Nc5 14. Rad1) 14. e4 Nac7 15. Rad1 Bf6 {, and now not} 16. exd5 (
{but} 16. Qc2 $5) ({or} 16. Rfe1 $5 {with a very promising game}) 16... Nxd5
17. Nxd5 cxd5 18. Ne3 Nc7 19. Bxc7 Qxc7 {with a draw in view of} 20. Nxd5 Bxd5
{(Timman-Karpov, Tilburg 1983).}) 12. e4 {By transposition a position from the
8 Nd4 variation has been reached (Razuvaev-Makarychev, 46th USSR Championship,
Tbilisi 1978).} Bf6 {(39) After lengthy hesitation Marjanovic follows in the
footsteps of Makarychev.} ({If} 12... dxe4 $6 13. Bxe4 {White has strong
pressure.}) ({In the game Kishnyov-Kholmov (Jurmala 1981) Black immediately
returned the pawn -} 12... Nd7 13. exd5 ({but} 13. Re1 $1 {was better}) 13...
Nxd5 14. Nxd5 cxd5 15. Bxd5 Bxd5 16. Qxd5 {and soon equalised. --- The theory
of this variation was only just making its first steps, and so it is not
surprising that both players spent a long time in thought.}) 13. exd5 {(51) 
Here is the improvement.} ({Razuvaev tried} 13. Qg4 {, and after} Nd7 {
(intending ...Ne5)} 14. f4 $6 g6 15. Nh6+ Kh8 16. e5 Bg7 {he did not gain
sufficient compensation for the pawn.}) ({But} 13. Bf4 $5 {came into
consideration (Hort-H.Olafsson, Buenos Aires 1980) - as I played in the 2nd
game of my first match with Karpov (Moscow 1984/85) and, although I
encountered the novelty} Bc8 $1 14. g4 $5 Nba6 {(Game No.6 in 'Kasparov vs.
Karpov 1975-1985'), I killed my opponent's desire for 4...Bb7: he then
switched to 4...Ba6.}) 13... cxd5 {(5)} ({After} 13... Nxd5 14. Nxd5 cxd5 {I
was intending to regain the pawn -} 15. Ne3 {and Nxd5,} ({but} 15. Bf4 $5 {is
interesting (Shirov-Adams, 4th match game, Elista 2007). Not surprisingly,
Marjanovic prefers to keep the extra material, especially since for the moment
no particular dangers for Black are apparent.})) 14. Bf4 {(7)} Nba6 15. Re1 {
(20) The most natural developing move;} ({which since then has occurred three
times more often than the alternative} 15. Rc1 {.}) 15... Qd7 $5 {(15) A
perfectly acceptable reply, but not the only one.} ({Initially} 15... Nc5 {
seemed better, but before the 1984/85 match we discovered that after} 16. Bd6
Re8 17. Rxe8+ Nxe8 18. Bxc5 (18. Bxd5 $5 {is also very interesting}) 18... bxc5
19. Nxd5 Rb8 20. Nxf6+ Qxf6 21. Bxb7 Qxf5 (21... Rxb7 $2 {is bad in view of}
22. Qd5 $1 Rxb2 $2 23. Re1 Rb8 24. Ne7+ {and Nc6}) 22. Qd5 $1 Qxd5 23. Bxd5
Rxb2 24. Rc1 {Black has an unpleasant endgame: the white bishop is clearly
stronger than the knight.}) ({However, neither after} 15... Bc8 $5 16. Nd6 (16.
Nd4 Bb7) 16... Bxc3 17. bxc3 Be6 {, nor after the move in the game were we
able to devise anything promising, and in 1984 I rejected 13 exd5.}) 16. Bh3 $1
{(10)} ({There is little point in playing} 16. Qg4 {in view of} Bc8 $1 17. Re5
(17. Ne7+ $2 Qxe7) 17... Bxe5 (17... Kh8 $5) 18. Bxe5 f6 19. Bxc7 Nxc7 20. Nxd5
Kh8 21. Nxc7 Qxc7 22. Bxa8 Bxf5 23. Qxf5 Rxa8 {with equality.}) 16... Kh8 $2 {
(12) A fatal mistake: the opponent 'loses control'.} (16... Qc6 $2 {was bad:}
17. Rc1 {(threatening Ne4)} Nc5 18. Be5 $1 Rfe8 (18... d4 19. Ne4) 19. Nd4 {,
and the queen is lost.}) ({But if Marjanovic had had the sense to move his
queen back -} 16... Qd8 $1 {, the battle would only just have been beginning:}
17. Rc1 ({or} 17. Qg4 Bc8 18. Qf3 Be6) 17... d4 18. Ne4 Bxe4 19. Rxe4 Ne6 20.
Bd6 Re8 {, maintaining the balance.}) 17. Ne4 $1 {Now White's attack develops
unhindered.} Bxb2 {(14) Was there a better defence?} ({Hardly:} 17... Rae8 18.
Nxf6 Rxe1+ 19. Qxe1 gxf6 20. Bd6 Rg8 21. Qe7 Qxe7 22. Bxe7 Rb8 (22... Rg6 23.
Nd6) 23. Bxf6+ Kg8 24. Re1 Ne6 25. Bg2 {and wins.}) 18. Ng5 $1 {(3) The
concentration of white pieces on the kingside clearly exceeds the black king's
defensive possibilities. --- When I was showing the game to my team colleagues
that evening, I emotionally exclaimed: 'Look, all his pieces are on the
queenside, whereas mine are on the kingside, but that's where his king also
is!' This was also the theme of my junior game with Privorotsky (Game No.7)
and it occurred many times in my later games, for example: Kasparov-Yurtaev 
(Moscow 1977), S.Garcia-Kasparov (Baku 1980), or the 6th game of my first
match with Karpov (Game No.94).} Qc6 {(15)} ({If} 18... Ne6 {White would have
won with both the simple} 19. Nd6 ({and the combinative} 19. Nxg7 $1 Kxg7 20.
Qh5 {etc.})) 19. Ne7 {(2)} Qf6 {(2)} 20. Nxh7 $1 Qd4 {(4)} 21. Qh5 g6 22. Qh4
Bxa1 {(8) Instead of resigning, Marjanovic unexpectedly removed my queen's
rook - the only white piece which was spoiling the overall picture, by not
participating in the play. I breathed a sigh of relief: this negligent rook
was getting on my nerves.} 23. Nf6+ ({Black resigned in view of} 23. Nf6+ Kg7
24. Qh6+ Kxf6 25. Bg5# {. Times: 1.50-2.10.}) (23. -- {This game was later
named one of the most brilliant in the Olympiad. We won the match 2½-1½,
but by the same score the Hungarians defeated Israel. --- In the 5th round
match with Bulgaria I was involved in an unfortunate incident. Playing Black
against Krum Georgiev, I chose a sharp tactical variation of the Sicilian
Defence (Karpov: 'We advised him against doing this: in a quiet technical
battle Kasparov would have had more chances'), but my opponent found a 'hole'
in it.}) (23. -- {Roshal: 'The round lasted longer than usual, because a crowd
gathered around the board of Garry Kasparov and Krum Georgiev, disturbing the
other games (the English even made a protest), and the clocks on the
neighbouring boards had to be stopped. After gaining a big advantage in a
forcing variation, the Bulgarian master grew nervous in anticipation of
victory and he unexpectedly committed, as chess players say, a "fingerfehler"
- he picked up the wrong piece. Chaos ensued.' --- Indeed, on the 21st move
Georgiev wanted to regain the piece by Bg5xe7 and only then capture the
d6-pawn, but instead of this he immediately touched my d6-pawn, after which he
should have taken it with his rook - and promptly resigned. But Krum did not
do this: he quickly took his hand off the d6-pawn and played Bxe7. Karpov, who
was playing on a neighbouring board, later recalled: 'Kasparov rightly
demanded: touch - move! Georgiev denied it. A row broke out. Although there
were no witnesses, the Bulgarian team unanimously took the side of their
compatriot: one would think that they had all been looking only at this board.
But I was in fact looking to one side and I saw nearly everything (besides,
Georgiev is a poor actor - he sat hunched and uncomfortable, but on sensing
support he gradually straightened up), but I was an interested witness, and a
neutral one was demanded. I repeat: there weren't any. And suddenly
grandmaster Kirov brought up the Brazilian Lucena, the president of the
Central American Zone. Here, he said, is a neutral witness who saw everything.
And Lucena, without batting an eyelid, stated: yes, I saw everything; Kasparov
is wrong. But I saw that at the moment when the rules were violated Lucena was
a long way away and he could not have seen anything!'}) (23. -- {To be honest,
I did not remember who testified in my opponent's favour, but to make a
correct judgement on the situation it wasn't necessary to have any witnesses:
it was sufficient to look at Georgiev himself - it was all written all over
his face! Roshal: 'After lengthy discussions, Lothar Schmid, the chief arbiter
of the Olympiad, let this mistake go unpunished. In my view, the Soviet team
acted with tact and magnanimity, but it protested against this decision by the
arbiter.' And this despite the poor start and problems in every match... After
a lengthy, but, alas, hopeless resistance I lost. --- Fortunately, Tal crushed
Radulov, and the match ended in a 2-2 draw. But the Hungarian grandmasters
defeated USA 3-1 and increased their lead over the USSR team to two points.
--- After this set-back, Baturinsky, the leader of the Soviet delegation, did
not want to play me in the 6th-round match against the Dutch, but I was eager
to get even. Then Karpov said that I should play - and he was proved right.})
1-0

[Event "46: World Chess Olympiad, Malta"]
[Site "?"]
[Date "1980.11.26"]
[Round "6"]
[White "Kasparov, G."]
[Black "Ligterink, G."]
[Result "1-0"]
[ECO "E18"]
[Annotator "Garry Kasparov"]
[PlyCount "47"]
[EventDate "1980.??.??"]
[Source "Everyman Chess"]
[SourceDate "2012.11.28"]

1. d4 Nf6 2. c4 e6 3. Nf3 b6 4. g3 {(7)} Bb7 ({Ligterink usually used to employ
} 4... Ba6 {- in the 8th round Speelman played this against me, and after} 5.
Nbd2 ({later I switched to} 5. b3) 5... Bb4 6. Qb3 Nc6 $6 7. d5 Bxd2+ 8. Bxd2
Ne7 9. Bc3 {White seized the initiative.}) 5. Bg2 Be7 6. Nc3 {(12)} ({It would
appear that my opponent wanted to repeat some position from my game with
Marjanovic (} 6. O-O O-O 7. d5 $5 {- Game No.45), and so I chose a different
path.}) 6... Ne4 7. Bd2 {A quiet, positional set-up, new for me, which that
day I played simply by intuition.} Bf6 8. O-O {(2)} ({An alternative is} 8. Qc2
{(Game No.99 in Volume V of 'My Great Predecessors').}) ({And soon an unclear
gambit also appeared:} 8. Rc1 Bxd4 $1 9. Nxd4 $1 Nxc3 10. Bxb7 Nxd1 11. Rxd1 e5
({or} 11... c6 12. Bf4 O-O 13. Bd6 Re8 14. Bxa8 Qc8 $1 {(Karpov-Salov,
Rotterdam 1989)}) 12. Nf5 g6 13. Ng7+ Ke7 {(Yusupov-Andrianov, Moscow 1981).})
8... O-O 9. Rc1 c5 ({To me this line seems strategically risky, as is} 9... d6
10. d5 Nxc3 ({or} 10... Nxd2 11. Nxd2 $1 {(Rashkovsky-Leibovich, Daugavpils
1978)}) 11. Bxc3 {(Gheorghiu-Ligterink, Le Havre 1977).}) ({More solid
alternatives are} 9... Nxd2 10. Qxd2 d6 11. d5 e5 {(Torre-Karpov, Brussels
1987; Kasparov-Salov, Skelleftea 1989)}) ({or} 9... d5 10. cxd5 exd5 11. Bf4 {
, and here not} Nxc3 $6 12. bxc3 Na6 13. e4 $1 dxe4 14. Nd2 {(Kasparov-Ponomariov, Linares 2003), but the typical 11...Na6 and ...c7-c5.})
10. d5 {(2)} ({The harmless} 10. Nxe4 Bxe4 11. Bc3 Nc6 {leads to equality 
(Petrosian-Portisch, 1st match game, Palma de Mallorca 1974).}) 10... exd5 11.
cxd5 Nxd2 12. Nxd2 {(7)} d6 {(2) Black seems to have coped successfully with
his opening problems. He has the two bishops and quite good prospects on the
queenside. But with the next new and unexpected move White reveals his trumps.}
13. Nde4 $1 {White establishes his knight in the centre, in order to exploit
its strength to prepare a pawn offensive and bind on the kingside (to some
extent this resembles the game with Csom - Game No.39).} ({In the event of the
standard} 13. Nc4 Ba6 14. Qb3 Bxc4 15. Qxc4 a6 16. a4 Nd7 {Black is indeed
alright and there is a complicated battle in prospect (Karpov-Portisch,
Tilburg 1988).}) 13... Re8 $6 {(31) Not the best reaction: Black allows the
exchange of his important bishop.} (13... Be7 {was more critical, although
Ligterink possibly did not like the attack} 14. f4 Nd7 15. g4 $1 a6 ({or} 15...
Nf6 16. Nf2 $1) 16. a4 {(Psakhis-A.Sokolov, Moscow 1981) - this theme was
later developed by Karpov (Game No.97 in Volume V of 'My Great Predecessors').}
) ({In the 1990s, following the example of van der Wiel, they also began
playing} 13... Be5 $5 {.}) ({But} 13... Na6 {, which I recommended in 'The
Test of Time', did not in fact become established in practice.}) 14. Qd2 {(2)}
a6 $6 {(10)} ({Again the move} 14... Be7 {should have been preferred.
Ligterink does not sense the impending danger and he considers his position to
be sufficiently solid. But, in defending the d6-pawn against attack by Nb5, he
has taken away a convenient square for his knight and weakened the b6-point.
These drawbacks are emphasised by White's following move.}) 15. b4 $1 {(15) 
Unexpectedly White begins play on the opponent's traditional part of the board.
This idea was suggested to me by the poor coordination of the black pieces and
the possibility of an attack on the d6-pawn.} Be7 {(14) A rather belated
retreat, but nothing better is apparent;} ({as the alternatives are weaker:} 
15... cxb4 $6 16. Nxf6+ Qxf6 17. Ne4 Qe7 18. Qxb4 Bxd5 19. Qxd6 Qe6 20. Rfd1
Bxe4 21. Qxe6 fxe6 22. Bxe4 Ra7 23. Rd6) ({or} 15... Bxc3 $6 16. Rxc3 cxb4 17.
Re3 {with the threats of Nxd6 and Qxb4.}) 16. bxc5 $1 {(4)} bxc5 17. Qf4 {(5) 
The main aim is not to allow the knight at b8 to come out.} Qc7 $2 {(10) Not
yet realising what is going on, Black tries to bring out his knight to d7: if
this should succeed, things will immediately be better for him.} ({However, it
was essential to play} 17... Bc8 $1 18. h4 h6 {, restraining White's offensive.
Now, however, there follows a lightning attack.}) (17... Ra7 {and ...Ba8 is
more passive - there is nothing for the bishop to do on the long diagonal.})
18. Na4 $1 {(3) With the threat of Naxc5. Black's position is beginning to
crack, and it all concludes amazingly quickly.} Qa5 {(11)} (18... Qd8 {would
not have brought any relief:} 19. Rb1 Ra7 (19... Bxd5 20. Rfd1) 20. Rb6 g5 21.
Qd2 Nd7 22. Rxd6 $1 {.}) 19. Rb1 $1 Bxd5 {(9)} 20. Nb6 Bxe4 21. Bxe4 Ra7 {It
appears that things are not so bad for Black, but a powerful combinative
stroke puts everything in its place.} 22. Nc8 $1 {Unexpected and very pretty:
nearly all the opponent's pieces are under attack.} Nc6 {(6)} (22... Rxc8 23.
Qf5 Bd8 24. Qxc8 Nd7 25. Bc6) ({or} 22... Rc7 23. Rxb8 Bf8 24. Rfb1 {was also
hopeless.}) 23. Nxa7 Nxa7 24. Bd5 ({Or} 24. Qf5 $1 g6 25. Qd7 {.}) ({But as it
was Black resigned, in view of} 24. Bd5 Rf8 25. Rb7 {. Times: 1.07-1.44.}) (
24. -- {We confidently defeated the Dutch (3-1), but the Hungarians overcame
the English (2½-1½) and retained a lead of one and a half points. --- In
the 7th round the central match of the tournament, USSR-Hungary, took place.
Our opponents fought to the death and quite quickly gained three draws (Csom
accurately neutralised my attempts to complicate the play in a King's Indian
Defence), while Tal tried to disrupt the balance in his game with Sax and
nearly lost. Alas, the match ended in a draw. At the previous Olympiad we had
even beaten the Hungarians - and all the same we finished a point behind them..
. --- In the 8th round I won against Speelman and we defeated the English (2½-1½), while the Hungarians drew 2-2 with the Yugoslavs. But in the 9th
round they crushed the Finns (3½-½), while we drew 2-2 with Czechoslovakia
(I was rested that day). Five rounds before the finish the gap behind the
leaders became critical: Hungary - 26 out of 36, USSR - 23½. The question of
first place seemed decided.}) (24. -- {But here the serious pursuit began! At
last Karpov ran into form (at the start he had been slightly unwell), and our
team genuinely united, whereas the Hungarians suffered something of a slump.
--- 10th round: Hungary-Holland - 2-2; USSR-Iceland - 3½-½ (I beat
Petursson with White). --- 11th round: Hungary-Czechoslovakia - 2-2; USSR-USA
- 2½-1½ (I managed to overcome the highly experienced Shamkovich). ---
12th round: Hungary-Romania - 3-1; USSR-Argentina - 3½-½. That day I again
had Black - against the 25-year-old master Sergio Giardelli (see the following
game).}) 1-0

[Event "47: World Chess Olympiad, Malta"]
[Site "?"]
[Date "1980.12.03"]
[Round "12"]
[White "Giardelli, S."]
[Black "Kasparov, G."]
[Result "0-1"]
[ECO "A16"]
[Annotator "Garry Kasparov"]
[PlyCount "64"]
[EventDate "1980.??.??"]
[Source "Everyman Chess"]
[SourceDate "2012.11.28"]

1. c4 c6 {(5) My opponent regularly used to choose one and the same set-up
with White: c2-c4, g2-g3, Bg2, Nc3, e2-e3 and Nge2. And I tried to exploit
this, by displaying unusual flexibility.} 2. Nf3 {(3) A minor success for me:
now the knight will not go to e2.} ({After} 2. g3 d5 {this would be altogether
pointless.}) 2... g6 3. g3 Bg7 4. Bg2 Nf6 {(4)} 5. O-O O-O 6. Nc3 {(13)} d5 {
(8)} 7. cxd5 {(5)} cxd5 {(2)} 8. d3 $6 {(6)} (8. d4 Ne4 {would have led to a
reasonable version for Black of the Grünfeld Defence. Not being an expert on
theory, Giardelli preferred to proceed along unexplored paths.}) 8... Nc6 9.
Qb3 {White tries to create pressure on d5 and b7, but this turns out to favour
Black, who exploits the early development of the queen.} (9. Bd2 {was more
sensible, although here too after} e5 10. Bg5 Be6 {Black has no reason for
complaint.}) 9... d4 {(38)} 10. Nb5 {(8)} ({The 'sideways' move} 10. Na4 {
would have run into} b6 $1 {, after which the knight has no future, and the
pressure on the long diagonal can be neutralised by ...Be6-d5.}) 10... a6 {(5)}
11. Na3 {(7)} ({If} 11. Qa4 {, then} Nd5 {is strong, forcing} 12. Na3 h6 13.
Bd2 Be6 {with excellent play for Black.}) 11... b5 {(8)} ({The white knight
has nevertheless ended up out of play, and the weakness of the long diagonal
cannot be exploited (} 11... b5 12. Qc2 Bb7 13. Ne5 Nb4 14. Qb3 Nfd5 {) - the
opening has definitely gone in Black's favour.}) 12. Bf4 {(8)} Be6 {(8)} 13.
Qc2 Rc8 14. Qd2 Bd5 15. Rfc1 Nd7 {(9) The preparations for the battle are
complete. Now White has to hurry: if Black should succeed in playing ...e7-e5,
...Qe7 and ...Nb6, his position will become strategically won.} ({But it would
have been even better to leave the knight on f6:} 15... Re8 $6 16. Nc2 e5 17.
Bg5 Qd6 {with a very comfortable game.}) 16. Nc2 {(8)} e5 {(15)} ({The direct
attempt to prevent the white knight from going to b4 by} 16... a5 {is not so
successful, if only in view of} 17. Na3 Qb6 18. Ne5 $1 {.}) 17. Bh6 {(13)} (17.
Bg5 $6 f6 18. Bh6 {is weaker in view of} Bxh6 19. Qxh6 Nb6 {(when} 20. e3 $2
Na4 $1 {is bad for White) or 19...Nc5!?.}) 17... Qe7 18. Bxg7 {(4)} Kxg7 19. e3
$1 {(13) Since Nb4 is not possible, White brings his knight into play by
another way, undermining the enemy centre.} ({Marking time would not have
worked well, for example:} 19. a3 $6 Nc5 20. Nb4 Bxf3 $1 21. Bxf3 Na5 {with an
obvious advantage.}) 19... dxe3 ({If} 19... Qf6 {there could have followed} 20.
e4 $1 Be6 21. Nb4 (21. Ng5 $5) 21... Nxb4 22. Qxb4 {, when the weakness of
Black's queenside is rather perceptible - say,} Bg4 23. Nd2 Qb6 ({or} 23... Qg5
24. h4 $1 {and Nb3 with counterplay}) 24. Nb3) ({If Black didn't want to
capture on e3, then} 19... Qd6 $5 {was better, retaining the initiative after
both} 20. exd4 ({and} 20. e4 Be6 21. Ng5 Nc5) 20... exd4 {, despite the
d4-pawn being somewhat weak}) 20. Nxe3 ({Not} 20. fxe3 $2 Rfd8 {.}) 20... Bxf3
21. Bxf3 Nd4 22. Bg2 {At first sight the backward d3-pawn and the powerful
knight on d4 give Black a clear advantage, but White also has his pluses: a
strong bishop, the weakness of Black's queenside, and the possibility of
exchanging knights (Nc2) or beginning a fight for the c-file (Rc3). In short,
the position is not altogether clear: with only one weakness for the opponent,
the game cannot be won! And I began looking for tactical ways of solving the
problems.} Nc5 {(5)} 23. Re1 $6 {(5)} ({Now} 23. Nc2 {would have been parried
by} Qd6) ({and} 23. Rc3 {by} Na4 {.}) ({Consideration should have been given to
} 23. Nd5 $5 Qe6 24. b4 Nd7 25. Kh1 {(f1). But Giardelli tries to exploit the
weakening of the e5-pawn.}) 23... h5 $6 {(4) The desire to exclude the threat
of Ng4 was understandable.} ({However, the immediate} 23... Rfd8 $1 {was more
accurate, since neither} 24. Kh1 ({nor} 24. Ng4 f6) 24... Nc6 (24... Qg5 $5)
25. Nd5 Qe6 26. Nf4 Qd7 27. Nd5 Qg4 {was at all promising for White.}) 24. Rac1
$6 {(5)} (24. Rac1 {his natural move, which also contains a trap (} Ncb3 $2 25.
axb3 Nxb3 26. Nd5 $1 Qe6 27. Qe3 {), is nevertheless not the best.}) (24. Nd5 {
was preferable:} Qe6 ({or} 24... Qd6 25. Rac1) 25. f4 Nd7 26. Rac1 {and
Black's advantage is smaller than in the game.}) 24... Rfd8 {(6) With the
strong threat of 25...Nxd3 or 25...Nc(d)b3.} 25. Rc3 {(7) White does not have
a great choice.} ({If} 25. Kh1 $2 {Black has the decisive} Ncb3 $1 26. axb3
Nxb3 27. Nd5 Rxd5 $1 28. Rxc8 (28. Qe3 Rxd3) 28... Nxd2 29. Bxd5 Qd6 $1 30. Bg2
Qxd3 31. Rc3 Qd4 32. Rd1 Qa4 $1) ({while} 25. Nd5 $6 {is now insufficient in
view of} Qe6 {, and the knight has to retreat.}) 25... Qf6 $6 {(13)} ({Not
succumbing to provocation:} 25... b4 $6 26. Rc4 Nxd3 $6 (26... Qe6 27. Rec1 $1)
27. Qxd3 $1 Nf3+ 28. Bxf3 Rxd3 29. Rxc8 Qe6 30. Rc7 Qxa2 31. Be2 {, when the
three pieces are rather stronger than the queen}) ({or} 25... e4 $6 26. Nc2 Qf6
27. Nxd4 Qxd4 28. Bxe4 ({but not} 28. Rec1 $2 exd3) 28... Nxe4 29. Rxe4 Qxe4
30. dxe4 Rxd2 31. Rxc8 Rxb2 32. a3 Rb3 33. a4 bxa4 34. Rc6 {with a drawn rook
endgame.}) ({However, only} 25... Na4 $1 26. Nd5 Qe6 {would have retained an
appreciable advantage.}) 26. Nc2 {(8) At last.} ({Before this I spent a long
time calculating} 26. Rec1 {(?).} Nxd3 $3 {, and the black knights demonstrate
miracles of mutual assistance:} 27. Rxc8 Nxc1 28. Rxd8 ({or} 28. Nd5 $6 Rxd5 $1
29. Bxd5 Qd6 $1 {with gain of material}) 28... Qxd8 $1 29. Kh1 $1 (29. Kf1 Nxa2
30. b3 ({or} 30. Bd5 Nc6 $1) 30... Qc7 $1) 29... Qc8 $1 30. a3 Nce2 31. h4 a5 {
etc.}) ({In the event of} 26. b4 $6 Nce6 {Black would also have retained the
advantage:} 27. Rxc8 ({or} 27. Nd5 Nf3+ 28. Bxf3 Qxf3 29. Rxe5 Nd4 {with a
powerful attack -} 30. Qb2 ({or} 30. Qe3 Rxc3 31. Nxc3 h4 $1) 30... h4 $1)
27... Rxc8 28. Qd1 Qe7 $1 {.}) (26. Nd5 Nf3+ 27. Bxf3 Qxf3 28. Nb4 {looked
tempting, but here too after} Qg4 29. a3 Ne6 30. Qe3 Ng5 {White's position is
in danger.}) 26... b4 $6 {(4) Previously, not seeing a subtle defence for
White on the 28th move, I attached an exclamation mark to this move. In fact
it is a mistake, conclusively throwing away the advantage.} ({Too little was
also promised by} 26... e4 $6 {(cf. the note to Black's 25th move)}) ({or} 
26... Nf3+ 27. Bxf3 Qxf3 28. Rxe5 Nxd3 29. Re3 $1 Nf4 30. Rxf3 Rxd2 31. gxf4
Rxc2 32. Rxc8 Rxc8 33. Ra3 Rc6 34. Kg2 {with a probable draw.}) ({Apparently I
should have reconciled myself to a small plus after} 26... Nce6 27. h4 Nxc2 28.
Qxc2 Nd4 29. Qd1 Qe6 {.}) 27. Nxb4 $1 {(4) Strictly the only reply.} ({After} 
27. Rc4 {(?), which I recommended in 'The Test of Time', the thunderous} Ne4 $3
{would have been immediately decisive (} 28. Bxe4 Rxc4 {, and} 29. dxc4 $2 {is
not possible because of} Nf3+ {).}) 27... e4 {Here I was already in severe
time-trouble: 6 minutes for 14 moves.} ({If} 27... a5 {, then} 28. Qc1 $1 {
looks quite good. But now, as it seemed to me, Black has complete domination:
his pieces control all the key points, and White would appear to be
defenceless against the combined attack of the queen, rooks and knights...})
28. Qe3 $2 {(3) Giardelli cracks under the pressure and commits a decisive
mistake.} (28. Qf4 $2 {was also bad:} Qxf4 29. gxf4 exd3) ({as was} 28. Rec1 $2
exd3 (28... Qb6 $5) 29. Re1 (29. Rxc5 Ne2+ 30. Kf1 Nxc1) ({or} 29. Nxd3 Nxd3
30. Qxd3 Nb3 $1 {is even worse}) 29... Ne2+ 30. Rxe2 dxe2 31. Qxe2 Na4 $1 32.
Rxc8 Rxc8 33. Nd3 Rb8 {with a technically won ending.}) ({The only way to save
the game was by the paradoxical} 28. dxe4 $3 {(we didn't see this either in
our calculations at the board, or in analysis after the game)} Nf3+ 29. Rxf3
Rxd2 30. Rxf6 Kxf6 31. Rc1 $1 Rdd8 $1 ({White is better after} 31... Rxb2 $2
32. Nxa6 Rb5 33. Bh3 $1 Rc6 34. Bd7) 32. Nd5+ {with two pawns for the exchange
and an immediate draw after} Kg7 33. Ne7 Rc7 34. Nd5 Rcc8 35. Ne7 {.}) 28... a5
$1 {(now Black's onslaught becomes a hurricane)} 29. Nc2 ({White would not
have been helped by either} 29. Rec1 exd3 30. Nd5 (30. Nxd3 Re8 $1) 30... Ne2+
31. Kf1 Qe6) ({or} 29. Nd5 Rxd5 30. dxe4 Rdd8 31. Rec1 Qb6 {.}) 29... Nxd3 {(2)
} 30. Rxc8 Rxc8 {The simplest. In all variations Black captures the more
'senior' piece.} 31. Qxd4 ({Or} 31. Nxd4 Nxe1 32. Bxe4 Rc4 $1 {.}) 31... Qxd4
32. Nxd4 Nxe1 ({Here too the e4-pawn is invulnerable:} 32... Nxe1 33. Bxe4 Rc4
{. Times: 2.27-2.27.}) (32... -- {By crushing the Argentines, we performed a
minor miracle - we caught up with the Hungarians! For the first time in the
tournament there were two leaders. The status quo was maintained in the 13th
round: the USSR-Romania and Hungary-Bulgaria matches produced the same result:
2½-1½. Before the 14th, last round the leading group looked like this:
USSR and Hungary - 35½ out of 52; Yugoslavia - 33; USA - 31½; England and
Czechoslovakia - 31. --- On the concluding day public attention was focused on
the matches in which the fate of the gold medals would be decided:
USSR-Denmark and Hungary-Iceland. At first the Hungarians went ahead - Pinter
won against Hjartarson. Geller restored the balance by spectacularly crushing
Hoi, but Portisch again gave his team the lead. Alas, I was unable to gain
more than a draw, but Balashov won. However, Ribli beat Arnason. And just
before the time control Sax cracked under the pressure and lost his advantage
against Petursson.}) (32... -- {Thus the Hungarians won their match 3½-½
and after 'normal time' they were a point ahead. But we still had the
adjourned game Karpov-Jakobsen. The world champion's opponent had real drawing
chances, but he sealed an incorrect move. After the adjournment Karpov
accurately converted his advantage into a win, and we again caught out rivals.
--- Now it all depended on the Buchholz scores and, strangely enough, the
destiny of first place was decided by the Greece-Scotland match. One team had
earlier lost to us, and the other to the Hungarians, and the only thing that
would suit us was a win for the Greeks by at least 3-1. I discovered this
myself when, after finishing my game, I studied the table with the last round
pairings. And I set off in search of this match, which was taking place in
another corner of the endlessly long hall. --- A genuine drama was then played
out. The Greeks were leading 1½-½, but in one of the remaining games they
stood no better, and in the other things were altogether hopeless. In
time-trouble, however, everything changed and in the adjourned games the
Greeks could now hope to score 1½ out of 2. During the interval I helped
them with their analysis, which provoked dissatisfaction on the part of our
rivals. But I think that the Greek masters would have been able to cope even
without my help. On the resumption they won one of the adjourned games, after
which everyone's attention was focused on the other. There was a moment when
all of our team members, led by Karpov, were standing by the board of Georgios
Makropoulos (incidentally, a future FIDE vice-president) and, with the most
inscrutable faces of which they were capable, were mentally praying to
themselves that he would advance his d-pawn. And he did so! The Greeks even
won 3½-½, and by a minimal margin we finished with a better Buchholz score
than the Hungarians (449½-448).}) (32... -- {From the press: 'Kasparov's
Olympiad debut proved extremely successful: the 17-year-old grandmaster
demonstrated excellent fighting qualities and he made a substantial
contribution to the team's overall success.' --- After playing, along with
Karpov, more games than anyone in the team - 12, I achieved the best score
among our players - 'plus seven'. It could have been even more, but, after
scoring 8½ out of 10, I felt terribly tired and at the finish I made two
draws with opponents who were obviously inferior in standard. Because of this
I was just half a point short of taking first place on my board with the
overall best result. --- Nikitin: 'When Garry returned to Moscow he agreed
with me that his performance at the Olympiad did not merit an assessment of
more than four out of five. On the play he could well have scored another one
or one and a half points, but the feeding and sleeping regime, to which adult
professionals were accustomed, proved difficult for the young debutant. This
factor, which had nothing to do with chess, led to increased excitability and,
as a consequence, to a loss of easiness in his play and to time-trouble. In
addition, Garry did not always choose the correct opening... But on the whole
he undoubtedly moved on to a new level. Kasparov's brilliant performances
provoked a chess boom in Azerbaijan. At the same time the epochal year of 1980
was the last quiet one for Garry, when he was able to think only about battles
on the chess board.'}) 0-1

[Event "?"]
[Site "?"]
[Date "????.??.??"]
[Round "?"]
[White "2.2: Adult Games: 1981-1982"]
[Black "?"]
[Result "*"]
[Annotator "Garry Kasparov"]
[PlyCount "1"]
[EventDate "1984.??.??"]
[SourceDate "2009.12.07"]

{First Battle with the Champion} 1. -- {Sokolsky Memorial TournamentTeam - 28½ out of 48; 2. Youth Team - 23½; 3. Senior Team - 23; 4. Second Team - 21.
Tournament of top boards: Kasparov - 4 out of 6; Karpov - 3½; Smyslov - 2½;
Romanishin - 2.} (1. -- {By January 1981 I was already rated sixth in the
world and third in my country - 2625, whereas the rating of the leader,
Anatoly Karpov, was 2690. A month later the international association of chess
journalists awarded Karpov the annual 'Oscar' - the prize for the best player
over the past year; second was Korchnoi, the challenger to the crown, and for
the first time I was placed third. We were rapidly converging - the world
champion and the world junior champion. Flohr wrote about this: 'I think that
in the near future Karpov and Kasparov will be meeting frequently, and sooner
or later they will battle in a clash at the very highest level.' --- The
obvious reduction in the gap between us was apparently beginning to concern
Karpov and his entourage. The first signs of this appeared in January. Nikitin:
'From Moscow there came a sudden chill in the air: they demanded from us a
detailed plan of Garry's activities for the year, including those not
concerned with chess. Never had the interest in his affairs been so
comprehensive! Obviously it was not only the Sports Committee that had taken
an interest in them...'}) (1. -- {Something came to light at the end of
February, at the match-tournament of USSR teams 'in honour of the 26th
Congress of the USSR Communist Party', held in the enormous athletics hall of
the Central Army Sports Club. Each of the four teams - first, second, veteran
and youth - consisted of eight players. Among the participants were the world
champion and four ex-champions! The line-up of the first team was Karpov,
Spassky, Polugayevsky, Petrosian, Tal, Beliavsky, Balashov and Geller, the
veterans were led by Smyslov, Bronstein and Taimanov, and the second team by
Romanishin, Tseshkovsky and Vaganian. --- Naturally, I was expecting to play
on board 1 for the youth team, and this was also anticipated by most of the
players. Unexpectedly the Federation officials began insisting that the player
on board 1 should be either Psakhis, who had just shared victory with
Beliavsky in the 48th USSR Championship (I did not take part in it: the
Olympiad had taken too much out of me), or Yusupov - a prize-winner in two
USSR Championships. But my rating was higher than all the members of the first
team, apart from Karpov and Spassky, and significantly higher than any of my
colleagues on the youth team. So what was the problem?}) (1. -- {And I
realised that Karpov, playing on board 1 for the main team, simply did not
want to play against me. There could be no other explanation! It ended in the
members of our team demanding a democratic vote, to decide who should lead it.
The officials did not like this, but they had no choice. In the voting it was
important to formulate the question correctly: if we had been invited to
arrange all eight players by board and decide the first board on the sum of
places, my rivals could have 'killed' me by putting me on a low board. But the
trainers of the youth team, Anatoly Bykhovsky and Vladimir Tukmakov, asked a
clear question: who should play on board 1? In the end I received five votes 
(Kasparov, Kochiev, Mikhalchishin, Lputian and Chiburdanidze) against three 
(Psakhis, Yusupov and Dolmatov). --- Nikitin: 'Fortunately, this flash of
youthful ambition did not have any unpleasant consequences: by the end of the
match-tournament no one remembered that not long before Garry and his young
colleagues had been at loggerheads.' --- Thus Karpov and I nevertheless ended
up facing each other on the chess board. But this occurred in the 3rd and 6th
rounds, and at the start the 'youths' played the second team. My game with the
Lvov grandmaster Oleg Romanishin, the author of numerous paradoxical opening
ideas, took a very tense course and in the time scramble it resembled a battle
on the edge of a precipice.}) *

[Event "48: USSR Team Tournament, Moscow"]
[Site "?"]
[Date "1981.02.23"]
[Round "1"]
[White "Kasparov, G."]
[Black "Romanishin, O."]
[Result "1-0"]
[ECO "D85"]
[Annotator "Garry Kasparov"]
[PlyCount "85"]
[EventDate "1981.??.??"]
[Source "Everyman Chess"]
[SourceDate "2012.11.28"]

1. d4 Nf6 2. c4 g6 3. Nc3 d5 4. cxd5 Nxd5 5. e4 Nxc3 6. bxc3 Bg7 7. Nf3 ({In
the early 1980s this attractive system almost supplanted other continuations,
including even} 7. Bc4 {(Game No.72).}) 7... c5 (7... b6 $6 {- Game No.38.}) 8.
Be3 ({I also employed} 8. Rb1 $5 O-O (8... Nc6 9. d5 $1) 9. Be2 Nc6 ({but I
myself defended with} 9... cxd4 10. cxd4 Qa5+ {(Game No.40 in 'Kasparov vs.
Karpov 1986-87'; Game No.82 in 'Revolution in the 70s')}) 10. d5 $1 {(Game Nos.
76-80 in 'Revolution in the 70s').}) 8... Qa5 {(5)} ({In my game with Razuvaev
(47th USSR Championship, Minsk 1979) I encountered the novelty} 8... Bg4 {and
instead of improvising with} 9. Qa4+ ({I should have fought for an advantage by
} 9. Rc1 $1 O-O 10. d5 $1 Qa5 11. Qd2 {(Game Nos. 65, 66 in 'Revolution in the
70s').})) 9. Qd2 Nc6 {The most accurate move order, as it transpired later,
only after numerous searches.} ({In the event of} 9... O-O 10. Rc1 -- ({,
Black does not equalise fully with} 10... Bg4 11. d5 $1 {(cf. above)}) ({, or} 
10... cxd4 11. cxd4 Qxd2+ 12. Nxd2 $1 {(Game No.68 in 'Revolution in the 70s')}
) ({, or} 10... e6 $6 11. Bh6 $1 Nc6 12. h4 $1 {(Game No.22 in 'Kasparov vs.
Karpov 1989-2009')}) ({, or the modern} 10... Rd8 11. d5 e6 12. Bg5 $5 {, when
the threat of an attack (12...Re8?! 13 d6 Bd7 14 Bh6! and h2-h4, Palo-Ivanchuk,
Skanderborg 2003; Anand-Leko, Miskolc 2009) forces the weakening} f6 13. Be3 ({
after} 13. Bf4 Qa4 $1 {for the moment Black holds on}) 13... exd5 14. exd5 {
(Kramnik-D.Howell, London 2010).})) ({Also after} 9... Bg4 10. Rb1 $1 {
(threatening Rb5)} a6 (10... Nd7 $5 {is not so clear (Giri-Nijboer, Eindhoven
2010)}) 11. Rxb7 Bxf3 12. gxf3 Nc6 13. Bc4 $1 O-O 14. O-O cxd4 15. cxd4 Bxd4
16. Bd5 {Black has merely a poor choice from several inferior endings 
(Kramnik-Kasparov, 2nd match game, London 2000; Yermolinsky-Azmaiparashvili,
Hyderabad 2002).}) 10. Rc1 {(2)} ({If} 10. Rb1 {, in order after} a6 ({a
clever queen sacrifice is possible:} 10... O-O $5 11. Rb5 cxd4 12. Rxa5 dxe3
13. Qxe3 Nxa5 {(Game Nos. 72, 73 in 'Revolution in the 70s')}) 11. Rc1 {to
exploit the weakening of the b6-square in the endgame.}) 10... cxd4 {(3)} ({
Later Black sometimes also tried the rather artificial} 10... Bg4 11. d5 Rd8
12. Qb2 (12. Be2 O-O 13. O-O e6 {is equal}) 12... Bxf3 13. gxf3 Nd4 {
(Yusupov-Anand, 6th match game, Wijk aan Zee 1994; I.Sokolov-Topalov, Sarajevo
2001).}) 11. cxd4 Qxd2+ 12. Kxd2 {Now White is forced to keep his king in the
centre, and Black exploits this factor to create counterplay: after all,
nearly all the pieces are still on the board!} O-O {(2) Obviously the next
few moves should show what there are more of in White's position - pluses or
minuses.} 13. d5 {(5) Strictly speaking, this and essentially the next move
is an interesting novelty, which Magerramov and I prepared in Baku just before
this match-tournament (the idea itself had occurred to me the previous year).}
({Against the developing} 13. Bb5 {Black replies with a pawn sacrifice -} f5 $1
{(Smejkal)} 14. exf5 Bxf5 15. Bxc6 (15. Rhd1 Be6 {is equal, Chekhov-Romanishin,
48th USSR Championship, Vilnius 1980/81}) 15... bxc6 16. Rxc6 Rab8 ({or} 16...
Rfb8 17. Kc3 Rb6 {(Seirawan-Mecking, 5th match game, Sao Paulo 1992) with
sufficient counterplay thanks to the two bishops and the insecure position of
the white king}) 17. Kc3 Be4 {(Platonov-Tukmakov, Tashkent 1980).}) 13... Rd8 {
(4)} 14. Ke1 $1 {The crux of my plan! This unexpected move opened a new trend,
one which is topical even today. White disconnects his rooks and loses a tempo,
agreeing to a slight (temporary!) lack of harmony in the placing of his pieces,
but he forces the black knight to leave c6 immediately, and each of its moves
has drawbacks.} Na5 $1 {(25) This reply, which at the time staggered me (in
my home analysis I had discarded it 'on general grounds' - the knight moves to
the edge of the board!), is today judged to be best, neutralising White's plan.
From a5 the knight deprives the white bishop of the c4-square and assists the
undermining moves ...e7-e6 and ...f7-f5.} ({After the 'logical'} 14... Ne5 $6 {
things are much easier for White:} 15. Nxe5 Bxe5 16. f4 Bd6 ({or} 16... Bg7 17.
Kf2 $1) 17. Kf2 e5 18. Bc5 $1 Bxc5+ 19. Rxc5 exf4 20. Kf3 {with advantage 
(Kramnik-Leko, 1st match game (rapid), Budapest 2001).}) ({And in the event of
} 14... Nb4 15. Bd2 $1 {all the same the knight is forced to move to the edge
of the board (15...Nxa2? 16 Rc2 is bad for Black), although practice has shown
that after} Na6 {White's achievements are only slight.}) 15. Bg5 {(35) After
a solid think I found a way of confusing Black by attacking the e7-pawn.} ({
Nothing was promised by} 15. Bb5 f5 $1) ({or} 15. Rc7 e6 16. Bg5 Rd7) ({nor by
the more justified} 15. Bd2 b6 16. Bb4 e6 $1 17. Be7 Rd7 18. d6 a6 19. Bd3 Bb7
20. Rc7 Rxc7 21. dxc7 Bf8 {(Cyborowski-Krasenkow, Warsaw 2002)}) ({or} 15. Bd3
b6 (15... e6 $5) 16. Bg5 (16. Ke2 e6 $1) 16... f6 17. Bf4 f5 18. Bc7 Rd7 19.
Bb5 Bh6 $1 {(Ftacnik-Naiditsch, Bundesliga 2008).}) 15... Bf6 {(17) An
enterprising move, leading to sharp play.} ({However, it soon transpired that} 
15... Bd7 $1 {is better} 16. -- ({, since} 16. Bxe7 $6 {is not a threat in
view of} Re8 17. d6 Nc6 18. Bb5 Bf8 $1) ({, while after} 16. Bd3 Rdc8 ({it
would appear that Dvoyris's move} 16... f5 $5 {is even stronger, with the idea
of} 17. Rc5 ({or} 17. e5 Be8 $1) 17... Rdc8 $1) 17. Ke2 e6 {Black is quite
alright (20 years later I myself played this against Kramnik - Game No.70 in
'Revolution in the 70s'). --- Since then and to this day White has been
actively seeking an advantage in other directions - say, 10 Rb1 or 8 Rb1.}))
16. Bd2 $5 {(27)} (16. Bxf6 exf6 17. Nd2 {was quieter. Here Black's doubled
pawns could have twice attacked the centre -} f5 18. f3 fxe4 19. fxe4 f5 {,
but White would have completed his development with} 20. Bd3 fxe4 21. Nxe4 Bf5
22. Ke2 {, retaining slightly the better chances.}) 16... b6 {White has gained
a brief respite. By luring the bishop to f6 he has forestalled the advance of
the f-pawn and hindered ...e7-e6, but after the development of the bishop at
b7 or g4 this undermining move will become a reality. So, for consolidation
White has one tempo available. This is quite sufficient if he acts
energetically!} 17. Rc7 $1 {At first sight White shows a frivolous lack of
concern for his development problems, but in the struggle for the initiative
he has already embarked on a slippery path, where it is not rules that have to
be reckoned with, but exceptions to them.} ({If} 17. Bb5 {both} Bb7 {followed
by ...e7-e6} ({and the immediate} 17... e6 $1 {are good (} 18. e5 $2 {is not
possible because of} Rxd5 $1 {).}) ({The rook move is aimed against both these
possibilities (} 17... Bb7 $4 18. Bxa5) (17... e6 18. e5 {).})) 17... Bg4 $1 {
(20) With the obvious desire to punish the opponent.} ({In 'The Test of Time'
I suggested that Black should have displayed caution and played} 17... Rd7 {,
although after} 18. Rc2 ({or} 18. Rxd7 Bxd7 19. Ba6 {White would have retained
a small plus.})) 18. Ba6 $1 {(17)} e6 $1 {(19) The retribution seems imminent,
but from this point the white pieces, although in a minority (without the rook
on h1), display amazing resourcefulness.} 19. Ng5 $1 {(3) Dynamic play: here
the fight for an advantage is closely connected with safety concerns (after
all, White is behind in development!).} ({In the event of} 19. Bg5 Bxg5 20.
Nxg5 exd5 21. Nxf7 Rd7) ({or} 19. dxe6 Bxe6 20. e5 Bg7 21. Ke2 Bxa2 22. Bxa5
bxa5 23. Ra1 Bd5 24. Rxa5 Rab8 {the initiative would have passed to Black.})
19... Be5 $1 {(17)} ({After} 19... exd5 $2 20. Nxf7 Rd7 21. Nh6+ Kg7 22. Rc8 $1
{Black would lose material.}) 20. Rxf7 $1 {(4) White's 'inflatable castle'
has unexpectedly proved to be made of highly durable material. I think that
this came as a surprise to Romanishin.} exd5 $5 ({Black does not restrict
himself to the modest} 20... h6 21. Nf3 Bxf3 22. Rxf3 exd5 23. exd5 Rxd5 {with
hopes only of equalising after} 24. Bxh6 ({or} 24. Rd3 {(Stohl)} Rxd3 25. Bxd3
Kg7) ({or} 24. Ke2 Re8 25. Re3 Rxd2+ $1 26. Kxd2 Bf4) 24... Re8 $1 25. Re3 b5 {
and ...Nc4.}) 21. f4 $1 {(12) This pawn is destined to play a leading role in
the destruction of the black king's fortress.} (21. f3 Bc8 $1) ({or} 21. Rxh7
dxe4 22. Rh4 Bc8 {(Stohl) would have been inaccurate.}) 21... Bg7 $1 {(5)} (
21... Bd4 $2 {was weak because of} 22. Rxh7 {, for example:} Nc4 ({or} 22...
dxe4 23. Bxa5 bxa5 24. Bc4+ Kf8 25. Rf7+ Ke8 26. Bb5+ Bd7 27. Rxd7 Rxd7 28.
Nxe4 Rb8 29. Bxd7+ Kxd7 30. Ke2 $1 Rb2+ 31. Kf3 Ke6 (31... Rxa2 $2 32. Rd1) 32.
Rd1 Kd5 33. Rd2 {, and again White wins}) 23. e5 Re8 {(with the threat of ...Bxe5)} 24. h3 $1 {, and the rook on h1 is ready to join the battle without
moving from its post (} Bxe5 25. fxe5 Rxe5+ 26. Kf2 Rf8+ 27. Kg3 Nxd2 28. hxg4
$1 {etc.).}) 22. f5 $1 {(10) An energetic move, intensifying the pressure.} ({
In 'The Test of Time' I gave preference to the variation} 22. h3 h6 23. hxg4
hxg5 24. Rc7 Re8 (24... dxe4 $2 25. Bxa5 bxa5 26. Bc4+ {is bad for Black}) ({
as is} 24... gxf4 $2 25. exd5 Rxd5 ({or} 25... Be5 26. d6 $1) 26. Bxa5) 25. Kf2
$1 Rxe4 26. Bd3 {with the initiative:} Re6 ({less good is} 26... Rd4 27. Rxg7+
Kxg7 28. Bc3 Nc6 29. Bb5) ({or} 26... Ra4 27. Bxg6 Rxa2 28. Bf7+ Kf8 29. Ke1 $1
Nc6 30. Rh7) 27. f5 Rc6 28. Rd7 Nc4 29. Bxg5 Ne5 30. Rxd5 {etc.}) ({But here I
forgot about my own recommendation in 'Informator' -} 22. h3 Bc8 $1 23. Bxc8
Rdxc8 $1 {, and White has to seek a way to equalise (} 24. Rd7 $5 {). --- Up
until now Romanishin has played excellently, but here, already short of time,
he makes a mistake.}) 22... dxe4 $2 {(10) It is easy to stumble in such a
complicated, highly tactical position without any clear guidelines.} ({After
the best move} 22... gxf5 $1 {I was intending to play} 23. h3 $1 Bh5 24. Rxg7+
Kxg7 25. Ne6+ Kf6 26. exf5 ({in the endgame after} 26. Nxd8 Rxd8 27. exf5 Nc4
$1 28. g4 Re8+ $1 29. Kd1 Bf7 {White's chances of an advantage are also slight}
) 26... Re8 27. g4 {with good compensation for the material deficit after} Bf7
({however, as one of the readers of the magazine 'Shakhmaty v SSSR' correctly
pointed out,} 27... Rxe6+ $1 28. fxe6 Bg6 {and ...Kxe6 would have got Black
out of his difficulties}) 28. Bg5+ $1 Ke5 29. Nc7 Rg8 30. Bh4 Raf8 31. Kf2 {
and Re1+. --- The capture of the e4-pawn looks more promising, but nothing
comes of it for Black.}) 23. Bxa5 $1 {(5)} (23. f6 $2 {did not work because of}
Bxf6 $1 (23... Bh6 $5) 24. Rxf6 e3 $1 25. Bxe3 Rd1+ 26. Kf2 Rxh1 27. Nf7 Kg7
28. Bd4 Nc6 $1 29. Rxc6+ Kxf7 30. Rc7+ Ke6 $1 31. Rxh7 Rc1 {.}) 23... bxa5 $6 {
(2) Another error.} ({The desperate} 23... e3 $2 {would have been refuted by}
24. Rxg7+ $1 Kxg7 25. Bc3+ Kh6 26. Nf7+ Kh5 27. Nxd8 Rxd8 28. Kf1 $1 {with the
idea of} Rd1+ 29. Be1 {.}) ({However, things would already have been difficult
for Black even after a more resilient defence:} 23... Rd1+ 24. Kf2 Rxh1 25. Bc4
Rc1 26. Rxa7+ Rxc4 27. Rxa8+ Bf8 28. Ne6 Kf7 29. Rxf8+ Ke7 30. Bxb6 Bxf5 31.
Rxf5 $1 gxf5 32. Nd4 {, and the bishop and knight will overcome the rook}) (
23... gxf5 24. Re7 $1 {, forcing the variation} Rd1+ 25. Kf2 bxa5 26. Rxd1 Bxd1
27. Bc4+ Kh8 28. Nf7+ Kg8 29. Nd8+ Kf8 30. Rf7+ Ke8 31. Bb5+ Kxd8 32. Rd7+ Kc8
33. Rxg7 Rb8 34. Bd7+ Kd8 35. Rg8+ Kc7 36. Rxb8 Kxb8 37. Bxf5 {with a won
bishop endgame.}) 24. Bc4 {(4) In time-trouble Romanishin finds an amazing
resource.} Bc3+ ({He would have lost after} 24... Rac8 $2 25. Rc7+) ({or} 24...
Rd4 $2 25. Rxa7+ (25. Bb3 $5) 25... Rxc4 26. Rxa8+ Bf8 27. Ne6) ({while} 24...
Rd1+ 25. Kf2 e3+ 26. Kg3 Be5+ 27. Kxg4 Rd4+ {would have led to a position from
the game.}) 25. Kf2 e3+ $1 26. Kg3 ({But not} 26. Kxe3 $2 Bd2+ 27. Kf2 Bxg5 28.
fxg6 hxg6 29. Rf4+ Kg7 30. Rxg4 Rd2+ 31. Kg3 Bf6 {with equality.}) 26... Be5+
27. Kxg4 ({It was not possible to preserve the bishop on c4:} 27. Kh4 $2 Rd4 $1
28. Rxa7+ Rxc4 29. Rxa8+ Kg7 30. Ra7+ Kg8 $1 {, forcing} 31. Ra8+ {with a draw.
}) 27... Rd4+ 28. Kh3 $1 Rxc4 {(Black appears to have beaten off the attack,
but the f-pawn has not yet had its say)} 29. f6 Bxf6 {White's mating threats
can be eliminated only at the cost of the bishop.} ({There are also few
chances of saving the game after} 29... Rc7 30. Rxc7 Bxc7 31. f7+ Kf8 (31...
Kh8 32. Ne6 Bd6 33. Re1 {is even worse}) 32. Ne6+ Kxf7 33. Nxc7 Rd8 34. Re1 {
etc.}) 30. Rxf6 Re8 31. Re1 {At this the line could have been drawn - but the
miracles have not yet finished! Thinking my position to be won, I relaxed
somewhat.} e2 32. Kg3 $6 {A delay;} ({it was simpler to pick up the e-pawn
immediately:} 32. Re6 Rxe6 33. Nxe6 Rc2 (33... Re4 $2 34. Ng5) 34. a4 Kf7 35.
Nf4 Rc4 36. Kg4 Rxa4 37. Rxe2 {and wins.}) 32... Ra4 33. Kf2 Rxa2 34. Ne6 (34.
Rf4) ({or} 34. Re6 Rxe6 35. Nxe6 Kf7 36. Nd4 {also deserved consideration.})
34... a4 35. Rb1 $2 {(2) And this is already a serious mistake: the e2-pawn
should not have been left alive.} ({I was continuing to have illusions of
mating finishes...} 35. Nd4 {would have won without any particular problems,
for example:} a3 ({it is the same after} 35... a5) ({or} 35... Kg7 36. Ra6 $1 (
{my earlier recommendation} 36. Rf3 {is worse because of} a3 37. Rxe2 Raxe2+
38. Nxe2 Rf8 $1) 36... Rf8+ 37. Nf3 Re8 38. Rxa7+ {etc.}) 36. Rxe2 Raxe2+ 37.
Nxe2 a5 (37... a2 38. Ra6) 38. Rf3 {.}) 35... a3 $1 36. Rb7 {(5)} e1=Q+ {
Allowing White some practical chances.} ({It was safer to force a draw from a
position where Black is even slightly stronger:} 36... Rb2 37. Rg7+ Kh8 38. Re7
Rbb8 39. Rxa7 Ra8 40. Rxa8 Rxa8 41. Nd4 a2 42. Nb3 Rb8 43. Ra6 Rxb3 44. Rxa2) (
{or} 36... Ra1 37. Kxe2 a2 38. Rg7+ Kh8 39. Rxa7 Rg1 40. Rff7 ({or} 40. Rf1 {
- Stohl}) 40... a1=Q 41. Rxh7+ Kg8 42. Rag7+ Qxg7 43. Rxg7+ Kh8 44. Rxg6 Kh7
45. Rf6 Rxg2+ 46. Kf3 {, and Black's two rooks are unable to overcome the rook
and knight.}) 37. Kxe1 Rxg2 38. Rg7+ Kh8 39. Rgf7 {Threats to the king in
time-trouble are especially dangerous, even if there is a possibility of
parrying them.} h5 {With his flag hanging, Black decides to clear the way for
his king, not having time to notice that misfortune will strike from the g5-
and h6-squares.} (39... h6 {was simpler, with a draw.}) 40. Kf1 Rxh2 $2 {A
tragic oversight: suddenly the mating threats are transformed into reality.} ({
And yet only one move separated Black from safety, the last one before the
time control -} 40... a2 $1 {. After} 41. Rxa7 {he could have unhurriedly
decided that} Rb2 $2 ({but that} 41... Rxh2 $1 42. Rxg6 a1=Q+ 43. Rxa1 Rh1+ 44.
Rg1 {would lead to a draw}) {, was bad because of} 42. Ng5 $1 Rb1+ (42... Re7
$2 43. Rf8+ Kg7 44. Ne6+ Kh6 45. Rh8+ {and mate}) 43. Kf2 Rb2+ (43... a1=Q $2
44. Rh7+ Kg8 45. Rxg6+ {and mate}) 44. Kg3 Rb3+ 45. Rf3 {, winning.}) 41. Rxg6
(41. Ng5 $1 Rh1+ 42. Kg2 {was more forceful, with a rapid mate.}) 41... Rxe6 (
41... a2 42. Rh6+) ({or} 41... Rh1+ 42. Kg2 Rg8 43. Rxg8+ Kxg8 44. Rg7+ {and
Kxh1 wins.}) 42. Rxe6 Kg8 43. Rxa7 {. Times: 2.29-2.30. --- I may have messed
up the finish of the game, but this win over a strong opponent, achieved in a
fierce, uncompromising battle, inspired me. The mood in the team was also good
- we won that difficult match 4½-3½.} 1-0

[Event "49: USSR Team Tournament, Moscow"]
[Site "?"]
[Date "1981.02.24"]
[Round "2"]
[White "Smyslov, V."]
[Black "Kasparov, G."]
[Result "0-1"]
[ECO "A30"]
[Annotator "Garry Kasparov"]
[PlyCount "54"]
[EventDate "1981.??.??"]
[Source "Everyman Chess"]
[SourceDate "2012.11.28"]

{The next day, for the first time, I played one-to-one with ex-world champion
Vasily Smyslov - previously we had met only six years earlier in a clock
simultaneous display. During the years that had elapsed I had managed to
surpass this legendary player on rating, but certainly not on experience. And,
of course, I felt anxious when I sat down opposite him at the chess board.} 1.
Nf3 c5 {(3)} 2. c4 Nf6 {(6)} 3. g3 {(5)} b6 {(3)} 4. Bg2 Bb7 5. O-O e6 6. Nc3
Be7 7. b3 {(3)} (7. d4 cxd4 8. Qxd4 d6 $1 {would have led to a tabiya of the
newly-fashionable 'hedgehog' system, which at that time, with the
encouragement of Magerramov, I used to employ often and quite successfully 
(Game No.59). But in the later period of his career Smyslov endeavoured to
play solidly, avoiding variations that were too unclear and tense.}) 7... O-O {
(4)} 8. Bb2 d6 ({Rejecting the 'classical'} 8... d5 {, as occurred in the
Smyslov-Karpov game played in the same match-tournament.}) 9. e3 {(4)} Nbd7 {
(4)} 10. d4 {(3)} ({First} 10. Qe2 a6 11. Rfd1 {is slightly more flexible, for
example:} Re8 (11... Qc7 12. Rac1) 12. d4 Ne4 13. Nxe4 ({or} 13. Rac1 Ndf6 14.
Nxe4 Bxe4 15. dxc5 bxc5 16. Nd2 Bxg2 17. Kxg2 Ra7 18. Qf3 Qb8 {with
approximate equality (Gelfand-Ivanchuk, Monte Carlo (rapid) 2004)}) 13... Bxe4
14. Nd2 Bxg2 15. Kxg2 Nf6 16. Rac1 Ra7 {½-½ (Smejkal-Kasparov, Moscow 1981)
.}) 10... a6 {(4)} 11. Qe2 {(3)} ({Black is happy with both} 11. Rc1 b5 $1 {
(Game No.55)}) ({and} 11. d5 exd5 12. Ne1 b5 $1 13. Nxd5 Nxd5 14. cxd5 ({or} 
14. Bxd5 Bxd5 15. Qxd5 Nb6 {(Malakhatko-Bunzmann, Zagan 1997)}) 14... Bf6 {
(Taimanov-Yudasin, Leningrad 1987).}) 11... Ne4 $1 {(20) Control over the
light squares in the centre is the most effective means of counterplay.} 12.
Rfd1 {(6) Such positions promise a lengthy manoeuvring battle. This makes all
the more surprising the changes which occur on the board within a short space
of time.} Qb8 $6 {(16)} ({Here, apart from} 12... Re8 {, transposing into a
position from my game with Smejkal (cf. above)}) ({Black also has the simple} 
12... Qc7 13. Rac1 Ndf6 {with equality. But I suddenly wanted to 'be a
dare-devil' - to enliven the game somehow! - and I allowed my opponent to
carry out a combination with the win of the exchange. The consequences of this
seemed to me to be not unfavourable for Black, but Smyslov quite reasonably
judged the complications to be in White's favour - and he accepted the
challenge.}) 13. Nxe4 {(8)} Bxe4 14. Ne5 $1 {The critical decision.} (14. Ne1
Bxg2 15. Nxg2 Nf6 16. Rac1 Qb7 {would have transposed into the analogous drawn
game Ehlvest-Portisch (Reggio Emilia 1989/90).}) 14... Bxg2 15. Nxd7 Qb7 16.
Nxf8 Bf3 $1 17. Qd3 $1 Rxf8 ({Of course, not} 17... Bxd1 $2 18. Qxh7+ {and
mate. In sacrificing the exchange, I was counting on the strength of my
light-square bishop, reckoning that it would play a leading role in the
forthcoming battle.}) 18. Rd2 {(12)} (18. d5 {was more cautious, but why
return the exchange when no immediate dangers are apparent?}) 18... f5 $1 {The
critical position, which is important for evaluating the exchange sacrifice.
Objectively the situation favours White, but to demonstrate this, very
energetic play is required of him. On reaching this position in my preliminary
calculations, I thought that it would not be easy for Smyslov to readjust from
unhurried manoeuvring to specific, calculating play. And that is what happened:
the sharp change in the character of the play discomforted my illustrious
opponent, and he catastrophically underestimated the potential strength of
Black's threats.} 19. Re1 $6 {(3) With the obvious intention of playing e3-e4
at a convenient moment, returning the exchange, but getting rid of the
dangerous bishop and gaining some advantage thanks to my pawn weaknesses.} ({
However, this is a loss of time, and it would have been better to immediately
open a 'second front' by} 19. Bc3 $5 Qa8 20. dxc5 bxc5 21. b4) ({or} 19. a3 $5
{with the intention of dxc5 and b3-b4. In this case it would have been more
difficult for Black to transfer his pieces so quickly for the attack on the
king.}) 19... Qc8 {(24)} ({I was terribly proud of this move (the threat is ...Qe8-h5) and I attached an exclamation mark to it, thinking that} 19... Qa8 {
was weaker because of the breakthrough} 20. dxc5 bxc5 21. b4 {(?!)} cxb4 22. c5
{(?). However, the cool-headed} dxc5 23. Qd7 Kf7 $1 {would have left White
empty-handed.}) ({Therefore} 19... Qc6 {(a8) was at the least no worse, and
may possibly have been better, since it would not have allowed the freeing
advance} 20. e4 {.} ({True, after} 20. a3 $1 a5 $1 ({the immediate} 20... Qe8 {
is weaker in view of} 21. dxc5 bxc5 22. b4 Qh5 23. bxc5 dxc5 24. Qf1) 21. Bc3 {
White would have continued to claim an advantage, but Black could have
maintained the intensity of the play, relying on his powerful bishop.})) 20.
Qc3 $2 {(24) White loses another important tempo and - most importantly - he
allows the enemy rook to go to f6.} ({If he did not want to open the queenside
by} 20. a3 $1 {etc.}) ({at the least he could have secured clear equality by a
breakthrough in the centre -} 20. e4 fxe4 21. Rxe4 {, for example:} e5 (21...
Bxe4 $6 22. Qxe4 {is unfavourable for Black}) ({or} 21... Bg5 22. Re3 $1 (22.
Rde2 $2 e5 $1 {, threatening ...Qh3}) 22... Bxe3 23. fxe3 {and Rf2 with a
probable draw}) 22. Re3 e4 23. Rxe4 Qh3 24. Qxf3 Rxf3 25. Rxe7 {. But it was
this that constituted the psychological paradox: it was not easy to give up
voluntarily the material advantage and immediately force a draw!}) 20... Rf6 $1
{(2)} 21. a3 $2 {(7) Here there is no longer time for this. In his confusion
Smyslov makes a third successive weak move, and Black's attack becomes
irresistible.} (21. Qd3 $2 Qe8 22. h4 (22. dxc5 Rh6) 22... Qh5 $1 {was also
bad for White}) ({but after} 21. dxc5 $1 bxc5 22. Qd3 e5 23. h4 {he would have
avoided an immediate rout, although} h6 {and ...g7-g5 would have left me with
a dangerous initiative.}) 21... Qe8 $1 {(2) It transpires that the awkward
placing of the white rooks deprives their king of the last hope of escaping
from the burning house, and the effectiveness of the Qc3 and Bb2 is equivalent
to zero. The concerted actions of the black pieces make for a swift rout.} 22.
dxc5 {(7)} Qh5 $1 {(with the obvious threat of ...Qxh2+)} 23. h4 {(2)} Qg4 ({Or
} 23... Rg6 $1 24. e4 Bxh4 {and wins.}) 24. Kh2 {(13)} bxc5 $1 {(2) Black
does not rush: there is no defence.} 25. Rh1 {(18)} Rg6 $1 {(12)} 26. Kg1 Bxh4
27. Qa5 {(4)} ({Also after} 27. Rxd6 Bxg3 28. Rd8+ Kf7 29. Kf1 Bh4 {it would
all have ended.}) 27... h6 ({This is no worse than} 27... Bxh1) ({or} 27... Qe4
{. Times: 2.19-2.00. --- This game made a great impression both on the
spectators, and on the participants. Taimanov asked in surprise: 'How was it
that, a clear exchange up, White lost so quickly?!' Such dynamic play was
unusual even for experienced fighters. This spectacular win made me the leader
of the tournament on the top boards, and our team crushed the senior team by
the record score 6½-1½.}) 0-1

[Event "50: USSR Team Tournament, Moscow"]
[Site "?"]
[Date "1981.02.25"]
[Round "3"]
[White "Kasparov, G."]
[Black "Karpov, A."]
[Result "1/2-1/2"]
[ECO "C42"]
[Annotator "Garry Kasparov"]
[PlyCount "81"]
[EventDate "1981.??.??"]
[Source "Everyman Chess"]
[SourceDate "2012.11.28"]

{On the third day my long-awaited meeting with Karpov occurred. The auditorium,
which accommodated about three thousand spectators, was overcrowded: chess
fans were impatient to see how our first encounter would end. Burning with a
desire to genuinely test myself and my powers, I arrived in a state of extreme
concentration, ready for a difficult battle.} 1. e4 {At that time I rarely
made this move, and in my preparations I thought that a little surprise in my
first one-to-one battle with the world champion would not do any harm: I
wanted to catch him unawares. However, it was I who was in for a surprise...}
e5 2. Nf3 Nf6 {Nikitin and I had prepared for the 'Spanish'! As for the
Petroff Defence, precisely at that time it had unexpectedly become very
popular. Karpov was also beginning to master it - two rounds later he also
played 2...Nf6 against Romanishin. Evidently he was testing this opening for
his forthcoming match with Korchnoi (who occasionally employed the Petroff),
and at the same he was beginning a gradual transition to different,
simplifying systems, more solid than the 'Spanish' and fully in accordance
with his style.} 3. Nxe5 d6 4. Nf3 Nxe4 5. d4 Be7 ({Also after} 5... d5 6. Bd3
Nc6 7. O-O Bg4 {the most energetic is} 8. c4 $1 {(Game No.67 in 'Kasparov vs.
Karpov 1975-1985'; Game No.6 in 'Kasparov vs. Karpov 1986-87').}) 6. Bd3 d5 7.
O-O {(5)} Nc6 8. Re1 {Here I did not yet have any new ideas, and the modern
theory of this system was only just beginning to take shape.} ({As it later
transpired in our first match (1984/85), the immediate} 8. c4 $1 {is better 
(Game No.100).}) 8... Bf5 ({While my opponent was thinking, I tried to
remember our old analyses of the 'obligatory' variation} 8... Bg4 9. c4 Nf6 10.
cxd5 (10. Nc3 $5 {- Game No.34 in 'Kasparov vs. Karpov 1975-1985'}) 10... Nxd5
({the idea} 10... Bxf3 $1 11. Qxf3 Qxd5 {(Game No.32 in 'Kasparov vs. Karpov
1975-1985') was not yet known: Smyslov introduced it in 1983}) 11. Nc3 {with a
slight advantage to White. We examined these positions a great deal in the
1970s, when preparing for games with Yusupov and Dolmatov. --- But Karpov made
a newly fashionable move, which had been successfully employed by Hübner in
his Candidates match with Adorjan (Bad Lauterberg, 10th game, 1980). Black's
idea is to provoke as much simplification as possible.}) 9. Nbd2 {(38) After
a long think I decided to play solidly and follow Adorjan;} ({although at the
board I also studied} 9. c4 Nb4 10. Bf1 {, a possibility which I later
mentioned to Nikitin. Already then I guessed that this was where chances of an
opening advantage should be sought. This is slightly more favourable for White
even than 8 c4 Nb4 9 Be2: the position of the bishop on f1 gives him half a
tempo... The plan with 9 c4! Nb4 10 Bf1! was soon brought into practice by
Karpov himself, who in 1982 won three opening duels against Portisch (cf. Game
No.88 in Volume V of 'My Great Predecessors'), and the move 8...Bf5 lost its
attraction.}) 9... Nxd2 10. Qxd2 Bxd3 11. Qxd3 O-O 12. c3 Qd7 {(10)} 13. Bf4 {
White has a minimal advantage, but in such a symmetrical position he has
nothing in particular, of course. Karpov probably thought that he would easily
gain a draw: all that is required of Black is accuracy.} a6 {An improvement.} (
{After} 13... Rfe8 14. h3 a6 15. Re3 Bd6 16. Ng5 g6 17. Bxd6 Qxd6 18. Rae1 Qd7
19. Nf3 Rxe3 20. Qxe3 {Hübner did not gain clear equality, although the game
ended in a draw.}) 14. Re3 {(17)} (14. Ne5 {is no better:} Nxe5 15. Bxe5 f6 16.
Bg3 Rfe8 17. Re2 Bf8 18. Rae1 {½-½ (Anand-Gelfand, Monte-Carlo (rapid)
2005).}) 14... Rae8 {(7)} 15. Rae1 Bd8 $1 {Another accurate move. After
defending his c7-pawn, Black intends to begin exchanging the heavy pieces on
the e-file. At this point Karpov offered me a draw, but after some thought I
declined. And after the game I explained: 'I never hear the audience, but here
I suddenly noticed how many people had arrived for our game. And I realised
that I did not have the right to betray their hopes - no, not of victory, but
of an uncompromising struggle.'} 16. h3 {(8)} Rxe3 17. Rxe3 ({After} 17. Qxe3 {
again} f6 {was possible,} ({but I did not like the activation of the black
queen -} 17... Qf5 {. In any case, it is hard for White to count on anything.})
) 17... f6 {(10)} ({Seeing that after} 17... Re8 {there is the unpleasant reply
} 18. Qf5 $1 Re6 19. h4 {, Karpov takes a more subtle decision - to exchange
rooks by ...Rf7-e7. The advantages of it are obvious: the e5-square is now
inaccessible to the white pieces, and the king has obtained a non-standard
escape square. And the drawback - the weakening of the e6-square, where the
black knight might have settled in order to suppress the pressure on the
e-file - can hardly be exploited.}) (17... Ne7 {was also recommended, and it
too would have led to inevitable equality, for example:} 18. Ne5 Qf5 19. Rf3
Qe6 20. Qd1 Ng6 21. Nxg6 fxg6 22. Re3 Qd7 23. Bg3 Bg5 24. Re5 Bf6 25. Re2 Rf7
26. a4 Re7 {.}) 18. Re2 {(29)} ({Many years later, in a game with Leko 
(Dortmund 1999), Karpov again went in for this position with Black and
demonstrated its viability after} 18. Nd2 Ne7 19. Nb3 Qf5 {with a quick draw.})
18... Rf7 {(14)} ({If} 18... Ne7 {I was planning} 19. b3 {and c2-c4 
(incidentally, in this way Karpov later broke up Korchnoi's position in the
4th game of their match in Merano), for example:} c6 (19... Qf5 20. Qxf5 Nxf5
21. g4 $1) 20. c4 Qf5 ({but} 20... Ng6 21. Bg3 Bc7 22. Bxc7 Qxc7 23. g3 Qd7 {
and ... Re8 is more consistent, gradually equalising}) 21. Qe3 $1 {.}) 19. Nd2
$1 {(4)} Be7 {(12)} ({Black evidently did not fancy the endgame with doubled
pawns after} 19... Re7 20. Nb3 Rxe2 21. Qxe2 Be7 22. Qg4 $1 Qxg4 23. hxg4 Bd6
24. Bxd6 cxd6 25. Nc1 Kf7 26. Nd3 {, although here his chances of a draw are
very considerable. But without necessity Karpov does not double his pawns - it
is not in his style!}) 20. Nf1 {(4) Black has covered the c5-point, and so
the knight changes course and goes to e3, where it will put the d5-pawn under
fire. However, only with the opponent's help is it possible to breath life
into this symmetrical position...} Bf8 {(6)} 21. Qf3 {(6)} Re7 $2 {(4) A
blunder - Black overlooks 23 Bxc7! (or in the variation 22 Ne3 Re4 - the move
23 Kf1!). I remember that this staggered me: the world champion, and he made
such an error?!} ({Of course, he should have begun with} 21... Nd8 22. Ne3 c6 {
, maintaining approximate equality. Now, more than a quarter of a century
later, I find my former optimism regarding White's 'active possibilities' to
be inexplicable: after} 23. Bg3 Re7 {followed by ...Nf7 Black has no problems.}
) 22. Ne3 {(suddenly White's advantage becomes apparent)} Nd8 {Forced.} ({
There is no other defence against the threat of Kf1, winning a pawn:} 22... Re4
23. Kf1 $1 ({not} 23. Bxc7 Rxd4 $1) ({or} 23. Qg3 Ne7 $1) 23... Ne7 24. Bxc7
Rxe3 (24... Qxc7 {is no better:} 25. Nxd5 Nxd5 26. Qxe4 Nf4 27. Re3) 25. Qxe3
Qxc7 26. Qe6+ Kh8 27. Qf7 Qd8 28. Re6 h6 29. c4 {, and a decisive breakthrough
is unavoidable:} Qc8 ({or} 29... dxc4 30. d5) 30. c5 {etc.}) 23. Bxc7 $1 {(5)}
Qxc7 24. Nxd5 Qd6 {(9)} ({This gives better chances of a defence than} 24...
Rxe2 25. Nxc7 Re1+ 26. Kh2 Bd6+ 27. g3 Bxc7 {, since here the coordination of
Black's forces is disrupted and White begins advancing his pawns with} 28. c4
$1 {, virtually forcing the win of a piece.}) 25. Nxe7+ Bxe7 26. Qe4 Bf8 {A
critical moment in the game. Now much depends on what plan White chooses. Alas,
lack of time (and, of course, experience!) did not allow me to choose the best
arrangement of my forces.} 27. Qe8 $2 {Intending to restrict still further the
mobility of the black pieces by the advance of the a- and b-pawns. However,
this seizure of space is a fundamentally incorrect plan, since it makes c3-c4
more difficult, does not change the pattern of the position and in the end
merely reduces White's advantage. As often happens, the window of real
opportunity for playing for a win was very narrow - exactly one move!} ({White
should have played} 27. c4 $1 {and advanced his c- and d-pawns (not the a- and
b-pawns).} -- ({. The creation of a strong passed pawn would have placed Black
on the verge of defeat, for example:} 27... b6 28. g3 Nf7 29. Kg2 g6 30. Rc2 (
30. Qd5 $5) 30... f5 31. Qf4 $1 Qxf4 (31... Qc6+ 32. Qf3) 32. gxf4 Nd8 33. c5
bxc5 34. dxc5 Ne6 35. c6 $1 Bd6 36. Rd2 Bxf4 37. Rd7 {and wins}) ({, or} 27...
Nc6 {in the hope of} 28. Qe6+ ({but after} 28. Rd2 $1 {Black has a difficult
position -} b6 (28... Qb4 $6 29. Qd5+ Kh8 30. Re2) 29. a3 a5 30. Rd3 $1 {with
the threat of c4-c5, while if} Qd7 ({or} 30... Nd8 {, then} 31. Rb3 $1)) 28...
Qxe6 29. Rxe6 Kf7 $1 {.})) 27... g6 28. a4 ({After the belated} 28. Re4 Kg7 29.
c4 {there was the resource} b6 $1 {, when it is now difficult for White to
break through:} 30. d5 $6 ({or} 30. a3 a5 31. Qb5 Nf7 {etc.}) 30... a5 31. g3
Qc7 32. Kg2 Bc5 {.}) 28... Kg7 {(10)} 29. b4 Qc7 {(5)} 30. Re3 Nf7 {(5) Black
has competently regrouped, stealthily activating his knight. In this game
Karpov once again showed himself to be an excellent defender, especially since,
as it seems to me, he always preferred playing with minor pieces against rook
and pawns.} 31. Qe6 Qd8 {(7)} (31... Bd6 {was also possible, but Karpov
methodically carries out his plan, at the same time denying the white queen an
excellent post at d5.}) 32. a5 h5 {(4)} 33. Qe4 Qd7 34. Qe6 Qd8 {White has
carried out in full his planned program, and his pawns look well placed,
restricting the black pieces, but now their advance involves the risk of
losing material.} (34... Qa4 {is dangerous in view of the simple} 35. g3 $1 {.}
) 35. Kf1 {A delay.} ({However, it was hardly any better to play} 35. Re1 Bd6)
({or} 35. h4 Nd6 36. g3 {- here after} Nf5 37. Re4 Qc7 $1 {(an important
nuance)} 38. Qd5 Nxg3 $1 39. fxg3 Qxg3+ 40. Kf1 Qf3+ 41. Ke1 Qxc3+ 42. Kf2 Bxb4
43. Qxb7+ Kh6 44. Qxa6 f5 45. Qf6 Qd2+ 46. Re2 Qf4+ {it all ends in perpetual.}
) 35... Nh6 36. g4 $6 {I very much didn't want to allow the knight to go to f5,
but if such weakening moves have to be made, it is clear that the worst is
over for Black.} ({However, also nothing special was given by} 36. g3 Nf5 37.
Rd3 Nh6 38. d5 Bd6 $1 (38... Nf7 $2 39. d6 $1) {, for example:} 39. c4 Bxb4 40.
d6 Nf7 41. d7 Bxa5 42. Qd5 Qb6 {, and the d-pawn is halted.}) 36... hxg4 37.
hxg4 Nf7 38. Ke2 {In the centre, behind the barricade of pawns, things are
more peaceful for the king than on the exposed kingside. But now the advance
of the pawns becomes extremely difficult and one can talk about a situation of
dynamic balance.} Ng5 39. Qb6 Qd7 40. Kd3 Bd6 41. Kc2 {. Here, instead of
adjourning the game, I offered a draw: there had already been too much
excitement! I regretted that I had not exploited the chance winning
opportunity (although Karpov could have avoided allowing me it). My opponent
also decided not to take a risk and he accepted my offer. --- Times: 2.33-2.31.
} (41. -- {Nikitin: 'The first reconnaissance in force was a wonderful success.
The world champion's young opponent was not at all his inferior in a
complicated, tense struggle.' But that day our team was comprehensively beaten
6-2 by the first team. --- My second duel with Karpov also took a tense course
and for all five hours it kept the spectators on the edge of their seats (Game
No.3 in 'Kasparov v. Karpov 1975-1985'). Flohr: 'The game was played in the
6th and last round of the match-tournament. Karpov's team - the USSR first
team - was already assured of victory, and Kasparov's team - the youth team -
was also assured of second place. But on this occasion too the tournament hall
of the Army Central Sports Club was crowded with chess fans, and the outcome
of the match, 4-4, was the result of an interesting struggle on nearly all the
boards.'}) (41. -- {The public's enormous interest in the clash of the leaders
was further raised by the fact that it would decide who would finish first in
the individual competition on board one. I was leading in the mini-tournament,
half a point ahead of the world champion: he was on 'plus one' thanks to a win
over Romanishin, while I was on 'plus two', having exchanged wins with
Romanishin and twice defeated Smyslov. Thus Karpov could overtake me only by
winning this game. But after interesting complications the result was again a
draw. As soon as the game ended, spectators poured on to the stage, forgetting
that on some of the other boards play was still in progress... --- Thus,
somewhat to my surprise, I managed to score the most points on board one. Now
Karpov could have been left in no doubt that in me he had a potentially
dangerous opponent. At the closing of the match-tournament, the chairman of
the USSR Chess Federation Vitaly Sevastyanov said (without, however, any
particular enthusiasm): 'We have witnessed the start of an interesting chess
dialogue'. --- Viktor Vasiliev: 'By any standards Anatoly Karpov is still
young: the age of 30 is a golden one for a chess player. But already eyeing
the champion's crown are opponents who are still young, even for the age of
acceleration. Who knows, perhaps in talent and ambition - also an important
trait - 18-year-old Garry Kasparov is not inferior to Fischer? But in
education and breadth of intellectual development he has certainly surpassed
the 18-year-old Fischer. Both games between Karpov and Kasparov were awaited
as the central events of the match-tournament, and both fully justified the
waiting... Kasparov's boldness, his self-confidence, liveliness of thought and
finally, his audacious eagerness for a fight with his formidable opponent -
all this made a big impression, to say nothing about the honourable outcome.
Two draws in two tense battles with the world champion, for whom a win in one
of them would have given the best result on board 1 - the youngster can be
proud of this.'}) 1/2-1/2

[Event "?"]
[Site "?"]
[Date "????.??.??"]
[Round "?"]
[White "Moscow 'Tournament of Stars'"]
[Black "?"]
[Result "*"]
[Annotator "Garry Kasparov"]
[PlyCount "1"]
[EventDate "1984.??.??"]
[SourceDate "2009.12.07"]

{International grandmaster tournament (Moscow, 4-24 April 1981): 1. Karpov - 9
out of 13; 2-4. Polugaevsky, Kasparov and Smyslov - 7½; 5-6. Gheorghiu and
Portisch - 7; 7-8. Beliavsky and Balashov - 6½; 9-10. Petrosian and
Andersson - 6; 11-13. Smejkal, Timman and Torre - 5½; 14. Geller - 4.} 1. --
{My success in the February parade of USSR teams became the decisive argument
in favour of my inclusion in the 'Tournament of Stars', held in the spring of
1981 in the prestigious International Trade Centre in Moscow. This
super-tournament, with the participation of the world champion, two
ex-champions and a further eleven well-known grandmasters from seven countries,
was my first serious test at world level. --- At the start I was paired with
Black against one of the favourites - the two-time USSR champion Alexander
Beliavsky. And although it all ended well for me, this game (and then the
games with Portisch and Timman) highlighted the problems that were still
present in my opening repertoire, which was not yet fully developed (see the
following game).} *

[Event "51: Grandmaster Tournament, Moscow"]
[Site "?"]
[Date "1981.04.04"]
[Round "1"]
[White "Beliavsky, A."]
[Black "Kasparov, G."]
[Result "0-1"]
[ECO "E83"]
[Annotator "Garry Kasparov"]
[PlyCount "80"]
[EventDate "1981.??.??"]
[Source "Everyman Chess"]
[SourceDate "2012.11.28"]

1. d4 Nf6 2. c4 g6 3. Nc3 Bg7 4. e4 d6 5. f3 O-O (5... Nc6 {- Game Nos. 12, 15.
}) 6. Be3 Nc6 {These moves were made rapidly: my opponent always chose the
Sämisch Attack, and at that time I played the variation with the development
of the knight at c6. --- Strangely enough, on the next two moves White spent
more than 40 minutes.} ({But two years later I surprised Beliavsky with the
gambit} 6... a6 7. Bd3 c5 {(Game No.81)}) ({while in the 1990s I gave
preference to} 6... e5 7. Nge2 ({or} 7. d5 c6) 7... c6 8. Qd2 Nbd7 {(Game Nos.
36, 38 in 'Kasparov vs. Karpov 1989-2009').}) 7. Qd2 {(21)} ({An alternative is
} 7. Nge2 a6 8. Nc1 e5 9. d5 Nd4 10. Nb3 Nxb3 11. Qxb3 c5 (11... Nd7 $5 12.
O-O-O f5 {, Salov-Dorfman, 51st USSR Championship, Lvov 1984}) 12. dxc6 bxc6
13. O-O-O Qe7 (13... Be6 $6 {is worse:} 14. Qa3 $1 Ne8 15. h4 $1 {,
Spassky-Korchnoi, 7th match game, Kiev 1968}) 14. Qb6 Bb7 15. g4 Rab8 (15...
Rfd8 $5) 16. h4 Rfc8 $2 (16... Rfd8 {is correct with the idea of} 17. h5 d5 $1
18. Bc5 Qe8) 17. h5 Nd5 $6 {a desperate chance;} (17... d5 18. Bc5 {favours
White}) 18. exd5 cxd5 19. Rxd5 $2 (19. cxd5 $1 {would have refuted Black's
idea:} Bxd5 ({or} 19... e4 20. hxg6 hxg6 21. Qa5 exf3 22. Ba7 Ra8 23. Bf2 {etc.
}) 20. Qxb8 $1 {and Nxd5}) 19... Bxd5 20. Nxd5 Qe6 21. Qa7 (21. Qa5 Rb5 $1)
21... Ra8 22. Qb7 ({White almost played} 22. Nc7 $2 {, but at the last moment
he noticed the stunning} Qxc4+ $1) 22... Rab8 {with a draw (Timman-Kasparov,
5th round).}) 7... a6 {(2)} (7... Rb8 8. Nge2 Re8 {is hardly any better - in
the event of} 9. Nc1 ({or} 9. d5 Ne5 10. Ng3 e6 $5 11. Bxa7 Ra8 12. Be3 exd5
13. cxd5 c6 14. dxc6 bxc6 15. Be2 h5 $1 {(Akopov-Kasparov, Baku 1978) Black
has good play for the pawn}) ({but} 9. O-O-O $1) ({or} 9. h4 $1 {is stronger})
9... e5 10. d5 Nd4 11. Nb3 c5 12. dxc6 bxc6 13. Nxd4 exd4 14. Bxd4 d5 {(both
black rooks are involved!).}) 8. Nge2 {(21)} Re8 $6 {(17) I wanted to take
the game away from the familiar paths, but this, as it later transpired, is a
dubious manoeuvre.} ({It looks to be a waste of a tempo and does not give any
pluses compared with the usual continuation} 8... Rb8 9. Nc1 ({or} 9. h4 $1 b5
(9... h5 {is more risky}) 10. h5 {, where I have had experience for both sides
(Game No.87)}) 9... e5 10. d5 Nd4 {.}) 9. Nc1 {(8) A solid positional move,
opening the way for the bishop on f1.} ({However, here too the sharp} 9. h4 $1
{is good:} h5 ({now} 9... b5 {is a dubious pawn sacrifice}) 10. O-O-O b5 11.
Nd5 $1 bxc4 12. Nxf6+ Bxf6 13. g4 $1 hxg4 14. h5 g5 15. Bxg5 e5 16. Bxf6 Qxf6
17. fxg4 $1 exd4 18. g5 Qf3 19. g6 $1 {with a dangerous attack (Lautier-Piket,
Cannes 1990).}) 9... e5 {(3)} 10. d5 (10. Nb3 {is weaker:} exd4 11. Nxd4 Ne5
12. Be2 c5 13. Nc2 Be6 {.}) 10... Nd4 11. N1e2 {(10) In his desire to
exchange the knight on d4 in the most convenient way, White grants the
opponent an additional possibility.} ({After} 11. Nb3 $1 {Black would have had
to choose between the dubious pawn sacrifice} c5 ({and an inferior game after} 
11... Nxb3 12. axb3 c5 13. g4 ({or, according to Stohl,} 13. b4 $1 cxb4 14. Na4
)) 12. dxc6 bxc6 (12... Nxc6 $6 13. Rd1 $1 {- Stohl}) 13. Nxd4 exd4 14. Bxd4 d5
{(at the time it appeared that Black had quite good compensation for the pawn,
but I did not greatly believe this)} 15. cxd5 cxd5 16. Bxf6 Bxf6 17. Nxd5 Bxb2
18. Rb1 Be5 19. Bc4 {. --- However, after 11 N1e2 White's chances are also
slightly better - for the reason that 8...Re8?! was played instead of 8...Rb8.}
) 11... c5 {(24)} 12. dxc6 Nxc6 {(2) This reply, which is bad with the knight
on b3, is logical here: because of his retarded development it is hard for
White to quickly exploit the defects in Black's position.} 13. Nd5 $1 {(17) 
The most energetic: the threat of Bb6 sets Black a difficult choice.} ({The
routine} 13. Rd1 {would have allowed him to develop his forces comfortably with
} Be6 {. --- At this moment Beliavsky looked very happy with his position. For
my part, I established a personal record for the thinking time over one move,
which I broke only in the 2nd game of my fourth match with Karpov (1987). In
the event of 8...Rb8 there would have been the simple reply 13...b5 with
equality, but what to do now?}) 13... b5 $5 {(68)} ({I needed more than an
hour to convince myself that passive defence (with the rook on e8!) was
unpromising after} 13... Nxd5 $6 14. cxd5 Nb8 (14... Ne7 15. Nc3) 15. h4 h5 16.
O-O-O) ({or} 13... Nd7 $6 14. h4 $1 {, and to decide on an exchange sacrifice
with the hope of exploiting White's retarded development.}) ({Alas, although
this audacious move, to which I previously attached only an exclamation mark,
did disconcert my opponent, a move underestimated by me was objectively better:
} 13... Be6 $1 {(natural development!)} 14. Bb6 Qd7 15. Nc7 Bxc4 16. Nc3 Be6 $1
17. Be2 Nd4 18. Nxa8 Rxa8 19. O-O Qc6 {with quite good piece play, although
after} 20. Bxd4 exd4 21. Nd1 {White retains a minimal plus: he is after all
the exchange up!}) 14. Bb6 {(14) Beliavsky picks up material, assuming that
Black's activity will prove temporary.} ({In 'The Test of Time' I recommended
that White should 'decline the Greek gift, and, in view of Black's approaching
time-trouble, follow a positional course -} 14. Nec3 {, although after} Nd4 ({
on the other hand, after} 14... Nxd5 $1 15. Nxd5 Rb8 16. Bd3 Nd4 17. O-O Be6
18. Rac1 Qd7 {and ...Rec8 Black does indeed have an almost equal game}) 15. --
(15. Bd3 Be6 {Black would have retained a good game.'}) ({. However,} 15. cxb5
$1 axb5 16. Bxb5 $1 {is stronger:} Nb3 ({or} 16... Nxd5 17. Bxd4 $1 exd4 18.
Nxd5 {with advantage to White (Stohl)}) 17. Bb6) (15. Nxf6+ Bxf6 16. cxb5 axb5
17. Bxb5 Bh4+ $1 {with good compensation for the pawn.})) 14... Qd7 15. Nc7 {
(2)} ({At first sight,} 15. cxb5 axb5 (15... Nxd5 $2 16. bxc6 Qxc6 17. Qxd5 $1
{and wins}) 16. Nc7 Bb7 {(?)} (16... Rb8 $1 17. Nxe8 Qxe8 {leads to an unclear
position, which could also have arisen in the game (cf. the note to White's
17th move, variation 'c')}) 17. Rd1 $1 {is much stronger, when Black will
definitely not have sufficient compensation for the exchange.}) 15... Rb8 {(12)
} 16. Nxe8 Qxe8 {Here Beliavsky thought for a long time: White has a wide
choice of tempting continuations, but everywhere Black has considerable
resources.} 17. Be3 $6 {(23) Trying to avoid all dangers, White decides in
the first instance to evacuate his king from the centre, but during this time
Black picks up a pawn and activates his pieces.} ({Let us consider the other
options:} 17. c5 Rb7 $5 (17... dxc5 18. Bxc5 Be6 {is simpler}) ({but not} 17...
Nd7 $6 18. Bc7 dxc5 19. Bxb8 Ndxb8 {because of} 20. h4 $1) 18. Qxd6 Bf8 19. Qd2
(19. Qxf6 $2 Be7 {, and the queen is trapped}) 19... Be6 20. Nc3 Nd7 $1 ({but
not my earlier move} 20... Rd7 {(?) because of} 21. Qe3 $1) 21. Nd5 Bxd5 22.
exd5 Nd4 23. Ba5 Nxc5 24. b4 Na4 25. Bd3 Rd7 26. O-O Rxd5 {with a pawn for the
exchange and excellent play}) (17. Bc7 $5 Rb7 18. Bxd6 bxc4 19. Ba3 (19. Rd1 $5
{and Qc1}) 19... Be6 {, and now not} 20. Nc3 $6 ({but} 20. Rd1) ({or} 20. O-O-O
{with a material advantage - but still with development incomplete}) 20... Rd7
$1) (17. cxb5 $5 -- ({, when I thought that} 17... Rxb6 {(?!)} 18. bxc6 d5 (
18... Rxc6 19. Nc3 {'gives Black counterplay'}) 19. exd5 e4 20. Rc1 $1 {(Stohl)
he cannot cope with the white pawns.}) ({. There only remains} 17... axb5 18.
Be3 (18. Bf2 b4 19. Rc1 {is possibly more accurate}) 18... d5 $1 19. exd5 Nd4
20. Kf2 $5 (20. Bxd4 exd4 21. Qxd4 Bb7) ({or} 20. Nc3 b4 21. Ne4 Nxd5 22. Bd3
Nxe3 23. Qxe3 b3 {is no better for White}) 20... Nf5 21. Nc3 e4 $5 {a bayonet
thrust;} ({if first} 21... Qd8 {, then} 22. a3 $1) 22. Be2 {at last;} (22. Bf4
Nh5 $5) 22... exf3 23. Bxf3 b4 24. Ne2 Bb7 {, and the 'holes' in the
opponent's position promise Black counterplay, for example:} 25. Bg5 Ne4+ 26.
Bxe4 Qxe4 27. Qf4 Qe8 28. g4 h6 {etc.})) 17... bxc4 18. Nc3 {(2)} Be6 {(2)} 19.
Be2 {(5) A psychologically difficult moment: White reconciles himself to the
loss of his advantage.} ({From afar my opponent had been intending the critical
} 19. Nd5 {, but here he noticed a spectacular further sacrifice:} Nxd5 $1 (
19... Bxd5 20. exd5 c3 $1 21. bxc3 Nd4 ({or} 21... Ne7 22. Bc4 Qa4 {is also
acceptable}) 22. Bc4 Qc8) 20. exd5 e4 21. dxe6 Qxe6 {. For the rook Black has
just two pawns, but he has a big lead in development, a pawn avalanche in the
centre and strong concrete threats:} 22. Rb1 $2 ({it is also dangerous to play
} 22. Rc1 $6 d5 {(Stohl)} 23. b3 exf3 24. Kf2 c3 $1 25. Rxc3 d4) ({while after
the counter-sacrifice} 22. Bxc4 Qxc4 23. Rc1 Qb5 {White is thinking only of
maintaining the balance}) 22... c3 {. --- This unexpected discovery disturbed
Beliavsky, and he preferred the quiet 19 Be2.}) 19... Nd4 {Now Black has a
pawn for the exchange and a comfortable game.} 20. O-O ({Not} 20. Bxd4 $2 exd4
21. Qxd4 Nd5 $1 22. Qd2 $2 Rxb2 {and wins (Stohl).}) (20. Rc1 {(an attempt to
prevent ...d6-d5) is hardly any better than the move in the game:} Rb7 21. O-O
Qb8 22. Rb1 d5 {(nevertheless!).}) 20... d5 21. exd5 {(4)} Nxd5 22. Nxd5 Bxd5 (
22... Bxd5 {. Black has the more active pieces, especially the knight on d4,
which is not so easily dislodged from its powerful outpost (} 23. f4 $2 Nxe2+
24. Qxe2 exf4 25. Rxf4 Rxb2 {). However, White has some material advantage and
there are no obvious weaknesses in his position, and so the situation is one
of dynamic balance.}) 23. Rf2 {(7)} h5 {(3) Not bad;} ({although} 23... Be6
24. Rc1 Qa4 {was also possible, after which there could have followed} 25. Bxc4
({or even} 25. Bxd4 exd4 26. Bxc4 Bxc4 27. b3 Bxb3 28. axb3 Qxb3 29. f4 {with
simplification and a probable draw}) 25... Bxc4 26. b3 Nxb3 27. axb3 Qxb3 28.
Bh6 {. --- On the first 23 moves the two players had used nearly all their
time, and now both had about 10 minutes, or perhaps even less, left on their
clocks. It is this that explains the subsequent uneven play and White's fatal
mistake on the 28th move.}) 24. Rc1 Qe6 25. Bf1 {(3)} h4 {The plan involving
the advance of the h-pawn looks tempting (especially in time-trouble);} ({but} 
25... Nf5 {should perhaps have been played, although after} 26. Rd1 {the
evaluation of the position would not have changed.}) 26. Re1 Qc6 ({Here too I
recommended} 26... Nf5 {, although the approximate variation} 27. Rd1 e4 28.
Ba7 e3 29. Qxd5 exf2+ 30. Bxf2 Qxd5 31. Rxd5 Rxb2 32. Bxc4 Rb1+ 33. Bf1 Bh6 34.
Re5 {leads to a drawn endgame.}) 27. Bh6 {This does not yet spoil anything;} ({
but} 27. f4 $1 {was more energetic, driving back the knight:} Nf5 ({if} 27...
Bf8 28. fxe5 Nf5 {, then} 29. Rxf5 $1) 28. fxe5 (28. Rd1 e4 $5) 28... Nxe3 (
28... Bxe5 29. Rxf5 $1 gxf5 30. Bd4 $1 Bxd4+ 31. Qxd4 Qb6 32. Re8+ Kh7 33. Rh8+
Kg6 34. Rg8+ {with perpetual check}) 29. Rxe3 (29. Qxe3 {is somewhat weaker in
view of} Bf8 $1) 29... Bh6 30. e6 $1 Qc5 (30... Bxe6 $2 31. Rxe6 $1) (30... f5
31. e7 {is equal}) 31. exf7+ Bxf7 32. Re8+ Rxe8 33. Qxh6 Re4 34. Qd2 {with a
draw. The practical advantage of 27 f4 was that Black could no longer have
'marked time', as in the game: he would have had to make a choice and take
some decision, and to calculate all these variations with just 4 minutes for
14 moves was not easy... True, Beliavsky's time-trouble was much more serious.}
) 27... Bh8 {Of course, the important bishop has to be retained.} 28. f4 $4 {
But now this active move, made at the most inappropriate moment, leads to
disaster: Black creates an ultra-powerful passed pawn.} (28. h3 $1 {,
defending against the threat of ...h4-h3, was essential. I over-optimistically
thought that 'even then Black's advantage is obvious'. In fact White has a
fairly solid position and one can still talk about a dynamic equilibrium.})
28... e4 {(the point!)} 29. Rd1 Be6 ({Or} 29... e3 $5 30. Qxe3 Nf5 31. Qd2 Bd4
{and wins (Stohl).}) 30. f5 ({In the event of} 30. Bg5 Nf5 {the black pawn
would have advanced unhindered to e3, making White's resistance hopeless:} 31.
Qa5 Kh7 $1 32. Rd8 Rxd8 33. Qxd8 e3 34. Re2 Qe4 35. Bf6 Bxf6 36. Qxf6 Qxf4 {
and wins. To somehow coordinate his pieces, Beliavsky sacrifices a pawn, but
he is no longer able to change the course of events.}) 30... Nxf5 31. Qf4 Re8 {
(3)} 32. Rfd2 $6 {Now the stray bishop is lost.} ({However,} 32. Bg5 e3 {
(Stohl)} ({or} 32... h3 {could also not have satisfied White.})) 32... Qc5+ 33.
Kh1 Be5 34. Qg5 Kh7 $1 {Here White could have resigned, but at this point the
players had only one minute left between them!} 35. Rd8 $6 Rxd8 36. Rxd8 Qf2 $1
{(an unpleasant interposition)} 37. Rd1 Nxh6 (37... Bd4 {(Stohl)}) ({or} 37...
e3 $1 {was much stronger, but the capture of the bishop does not spoil
anything.}) 38. Qxe5 e3 (38... Ng4 $5 39. Qxe4 Ne3 {.}) 39. Qc3 (39. h3 Bxh3
40. gxh3 Qf3+ 41. Kg1 Nf5 $1 {was also hopeless for White.}) 39... h3 40. Qe1
Ng4 $1 {The strongest move.} ({Although} 40... e2 $5 41. Qxf2 exd1=Q {would
have been more spectacular.}) ({The time control was reached, and White
resigned: ...e3-e2 is threatened, and if} 40... Ng4 41. Rc1 {, then} Bd5 42.
Qxf2 exf2 {and ...Ne3, mating. --- Times: 2.41-2.29.}) (40... -- {In the 2nd
round with White against Gheorghiu I gained a clearly better endgame. With
rooks on the board, the presence of opposite-colour bishops merely aggravated
the problems for Black, who had positional defects. However, with my 39th move
in time-trouble I lost the greater part of my advantage, and immediately after
the time control I made another 'weak move': instead of adjourning the game
and seeking ways to win, I offered a draw, which Gheorghiu joyfully accepted.
Later, observing how grandmasters seek the slightest chances in dead-drawn
positions, I frequently regretted making such a hasty peace offer... --- In
the 3rd round, not without some difficulty I gained a draw with Portisch, and
in the 4th I defeated Torre with White. By that time the leading group had
emerged: Karpov - 3½ out of 4; Kasparov and Smyslov - 3.}) (40... -- {In the
next three rounds my rivals restricted themselves to draws, and I gained a
real chance of catching the world champion, by achieving two draws with Black,
against Timman and Smyslov (precisely on my 18th birthday), and adjourning my
game against Andersson with excellent winning chances, although here too I
slightly let my opponent off the hook with my time-trouble 39th move. ---
However, the resumption was due to take place only after the 8th round, in
which for the second time in my life I met at the board with ex-world champion
Tigran Petrosian (see the following game). After our joint trip to Banja Luka
we were on excellent terms, and Nikitin and I had several times visited him
for creative discussions. But on that April day I was thirsting for victory
both in the game, and in the tournament! Later, after being given a masterful
lesson in defence and counterattack, for a long time I was reminded of a
light-minded d'Artagnan, eagerly galloping to conquer Paris, but on the way
suddenly encountering the hardened and cunning 'stranger from Meung'...}) 0-1

[Event "52: Grandmaster Tournament, Moscow"]
[Site "?"]
[Date "1981.04.14"]
[Round "8"]
[White "Kasparov, G."]
[Black "Petrosian, T."]
[Result "0-1"]
[ECO "E12"]
[Annotator "Garry Kasparov"]
[PlyCount "84"]
[EventDate "1981.??.??"]
[Source "Everyman Chess"]
[SourceDate "2012.11.28"]

1. d4 Nf6 2. c4 e6 3. Nf3 b6 4. a3 {Following the example of Petrosian himself!
} Bb7 (4... c5 {- Game Nos. 32, 68.}) 5. Nc3 d5 (5... Ne4 {- Game No.61.}) 6.
cxd5 Nxd5 7. e3 ({The alternative is} 7. Qc2 {(Game Nos. 73, 75, 98).}) 7...
Be7 8. Bb5+ c6 9. Bd3 Nxc3 {(4)} 10. bxc3 c5 (10... Nd7 {- Game No.43.}) 11.
O-O {(9)} O-O {(4)} ({As is well known,} 11... Nc6 $1 {(Game No.85) is more
accurate. Now White succeeds in weakening the black king's defences.}) 12. Qc2
$1 {(8)} g6 ({After} 12... h6 13. e4 Nc6 14. Bb2 Rc8 15. Qe2 Na5 16. Rad1 cxd4
17. cxd4 {White also has some advantage (Ribli-Hort, Germany 1991).}) 13. e4 {
(9)} Nc6 {(11)} (13... Qc7 $6 {is weaker:} 14. Qe2 Rd8 15. h4 $1 Nc6 16. Be3
Bf6 $6 17. e5 Bg7 18. h5 {with an attack (Polugayevsky-Petrosian, 10th round).}
) 14. Bh6 $6 (14. Be3 {is correct.}) 14... Re8 15. Rfd1 {(2)} Qc7 $6 {(11)} ({
It definitely made sense for Black to part with the exchange: the endgame after
} 15... cxd4 $1 16. cxd4 Nxd4 17. Nxd4 Qxd4 18. Bb5 Qxe4 19. Qxe4 Bxe4 20. Bxe8
Rxe8 21. Rd7 a5 22. a4 (22. Be3 b5 23. Rc1 $2 {is parried by} Bxa3 24. Rcc7 Bb2
$1 25. Rxf7 b4 $1 26. Rxh7 Be5 27. Rce7 Rb8) 22... Bc5 {would have promised
him every chance of a draw.}) 16. Qe2 {(6)} Red8 {(6)} 17. Qe3 $1 {(6) In
connection with e4-e5 and h2-h4-h5, White's position begins to look menacing.}
e5 $1 {(12)} ({If} 17... Rd7 {, then} 18. Bb5 $1 {is unpleasant, keeping Bf4
in reserve. At the cost of positional concessions, Petrosian suppresses the
incipient attack.}) 18. d5 {(58) On this one obvious move I spent nearly a
whole hour!} ({I very much wanted to exploit the opening of the a2-g8 diagonal
by playing} 18. Bc4 $6 exd4 19. cxd4 cxd4 20. Bxf7+ $6 Kxf7 21. Qb3+ {, but
after} Ke8 22. Qg8+ (22. e5 Bf8 $1) (22. Rac1 Qd6 $1) 22... Kd7 23. Qxh7 Kc8
24. Qxg6 Qd6 {nothing worthwhile would have come of it. Too much time was
wasted in vain, and I soon had cause to regret this.}) 18... Na5 19. c4 $5 {(3)
This weakening of the d4-point gives Black counter-chances;} ({but after} 19.
Ng5 c4 20. Be2 {it is also not easy for White to gain any real advantage:} Bc8
21. Qg3 f6 22. Nf3 Nb3 $1 (22... Bf8 $6 {is inferior:} 23. Bxf8 Rxf8 24. Nd2 $1
{and h2-h4-h5}) 23. Ra2 Nc5 24. Nd2 b5 {with a complicated struggle -} 25. a4
Nxa4 26. Nxc4 a6 27. h4 Bf8 {.}) 19... Nb3 {(2)} ({Yusupov and Dvoretsky
suggested} 19... f6 20. h4 Ba6 21. Nd2 Bf8 {and a possible ...Nb7-d6, but the
move in the game looks more logical.}) 20. Ra2 {(3)} f6 {(6)} 21. h4 Bc8 $6 ({
To all appearances, the immediate} 21... Bf8 $5 {(Yusupov, Dvoretsky) was
sounder. Now White succeeds in keeping his initiative alive.}) 22. Rb1 $1 Nd4
23. Nxd4 cxd4 24. Qg3 {(the thematic f2-f4 is now on the agenda)} Bf8 {(4)} 25.
Bd2 $1 {(4)} Bd6 {(8)} 26. Rf1 (26. h5 $5 {.}) 26... Qg7 {(8)} 27. a4 $6 {(5) 
Opening a second front! But in Petrosian's opinion this was an inaccuracy:
'White should not have made such a serious weakening of his queenside'.} ({
However, after} 27. f4 {Black had the reply} Bd7 28. fxe5 (28. Qh2 Rf8 29. Bb4
Qe7 $1) 28... Bxe5 29. Bf4 Rf8 30. Raf2 Rae8 {with a solid defence.}) ({The
correct solution was the paradoxical} 27. Bb4 $1 {(Yusupov, Dvoretsky). By
preventing ...Bd7, White carries out f2-f4 in a more comfortable situation:}
Qe7 ({or} 27... Ba6 28. Bxd6 Rxd6 29. f4 {etc.}) 28. f4 $1 {.}) 27... a5 $1 {
Fixing the weakness at a4. Now White's task is far more difficult, but I
realised this only later, whereas during the game I was merely staggered by
the boldness of my opponent, since I was sure that Black would be unable to
hold out against the combined pressure on the b-file and on the kingside. At
that time I used to think in concrete, tactical terms, whereas for Petrosian
it was long-term, strategic terms.} 28. Rb2 Bc5 (28... Rb8 $2 29. Rfb1 Bc5 30.
Bxa5 {and wins.}) 29. f4 {(4)} Bd7 {(8)} ({The prophylactic} 29... h6 {is
interesting} 30. -- ({, for example:} 30. h5 g5 31. fxg5 fxg5 32. Kh1 Rf8 {
(Petrosian)} 33. Rxf8+ Kxf8 34. Be2 Bd7 {with equality}) ({, or} 30. Qe1 $5 Ra7
$1 ({not} 30... Bd7 $2 31. fxe5 fxe5 32. Qc1 $1 Kh7 ({or} 32... Ba3 33. Bxh6 $1
Bxb2 34. Qg5 Qh7 35. Rf6 {and wins}) 33. Bxh6 $1) 31. Qb1 Rb7 32. fxe5 (32. Bc1
$5) 32... fxe5 33. Rb5 Kh7 $1 {(Yusupov, Dvoretsky).})) 30. h5 $1 {(4)} Bxa4 $2
{(8)} ({The more dangerous pawn should have been taken -} 30... gxh5 31. Qh4
Bg4 ({apart from 31...Bg4, an idea of Bologan's also comes into consideration:
} 31... Rf8 $5 32. Qxh5 Bxa4 33. fxe5 fxe5 34. Rxf8+ Rxf8 $1 35. Bh6 Qg6 36.
Qxg6+ hxg6 37. Bxf8 Kxf8 38. Kf1 Bd7 39. Ke2 a4 {with sufficient compensation
for the exchange}) 32. fxe5 fxe5 33. Bg5 Rf8 $1 (33... Re8 34. Bf6 $1) 34. Bf6
({if} 34. Rbf2 Rxf2 35. Rxf2 {Black has a good choice between} Re8 ({and} 35...
Rf8 36. Bf6 Rxf6 $1 37. Qxf6 Qxf6 38. Rxf6 Bd7 {with equality}) 36. Bf6 Qg6 $1
{, recommended by Yusupov and Dvoretsky}) 34... Qh6 35. Rbf2 Rae8 {with
approximate equality. Since} 36. d6 $2 {, is unfavourable;} ({White must play} 
36. Qg3 Qe3 37. Bxe5 Rxe5 $1 38. Qxe5 Bb4 $1 39. c5 Be1 40. Qg5+ $1 Qxg5 41.
Rxf8+ Kg7 {, when he has only perpetual check (Yusupov, Dvoretsky)}) 36... Bxd6
37. c5 Bxc5 38. Bc4+ Be6 39. Bxe6+ (39. Rf5 $2 Bxc4 40. Rg5+ Qg6 41. Qxh5 Kf7
$1 {and wins}) 39... Rxe6 40. Rf3 d3+ 41. Kh2 d2 42. Rg3+ Qg6 {.}) 31. h6 {(4)}
Qc7 {Petrosian was relying on the solidity of his position and was hoping
subsequently to exploit his passed a-pawn, but White's threats are too strong.}
32. f5 $6 {A tempting move;} ({and yet} 32. fxe5 $1 fxe5 33. Bg5 Rf8 34. Bf6 {
was correct - as shown by later analyses, including by me (both old and new),
Timman, and Yusupov with Dvoretsky, White's attack is irresistible:} -- (34...
Rxf6 35. Rxf6 Rf8 36. Rbxb6 $1 Bxb6 37. d6 $1 Qd8 38. Rxg6+ $1 Kf7 39. Qxe5
hxg6 40. Qd5+ Kf6 41. g4 $1) (34... Bd6 35. Rbf2 Rf7 36. c5 $5 ({or the crude} 
36. Bd8 $1 Rxd8 37. Rxf7 Qxf7 38. Rxf7 Kxf7 39. Qf3+ Ke7 {(otherwise Qf6)} 40.
Qg4 Rd7 41. Qe6+ Kd8 42. c5 $1) 36... bxc5 (36... Qxc5 37. Bxe5 Rxf2 ({or} 
37... Bxe5 38. Qxe5 Re8 39. Qg5 {and Rf6!}) 38. Rxf2 Bxe5 39. Qxe5 Qc1+ 40. Bf1
Qxh6 41. d6 $1) 37. Bc4 Raf8 38. Bxe5 $3 Bxe5 39. Rxf7 Rxf7 40. d6 $1 {(cf.
'New in Chess' 1986 No.4)}) (34... Rae8 35. Rbf2 Bd7 (35... Bd6 36. Rf5 $1 Bd7
37. Rg5) 36. Bg7 $1 ({this is simpler than my suggestion} 36. Kh2 {- cf. 'New
in Chess' 1987 No.5}) 36... Rxf2 (36... Rf4 37. Bxe5 $1 ({or} 37. Rxf4 exf4 38.
Rxf4 Bd6 39. e5 $1)) 37. Qxf2 Ba4 {(c8)} 38. d6 $1 Bxd6 39. c5 {and in all
variations White wins. --- It was impossible to calculate all these variations
at the board, especially in time-trouble, and I chose what seemed to me to be
a more forcing continuation.})) 32... g5 {(8)} 33. Bxg5 $1 {There is nothing
else.} fxg5 $2 ({In the event of the cool-headed} 33... Kf7 $1 {(I
underestimated this defence) White would have had to be satisfied with a solid
positional advantage after} 34. Bc1 $1 (34. Bd2 Rg8 35. Qh4 Ke7 36. g4 Be8 37.
g5 fxg5 38. Bxg5+ Kd7 39. Kh1 Bf7 {is unclear - Yusupov, Dvoretsky}) 34... Rg8
35. Qh3 $1 Ke7 36. g4 {(threatening 37 g5 fxg5 38 f6+)} Raf8 37. Rg2 {with the
unavoidable g4-g5 breakthrough (Bologan).}) 34. Qxg5+ Kf8 ({Not} 34... Kh8 $2
35. Qf6+ Kg8 36. Rf3 {.}) 35. Qf6+ $2 {(3)} ({White's entire preceding play
demanded the breakthrough} 35. f6 $1 Qf7 {(otherwise f6-f7)} 36. Qxe5 {, for
example:} -- (36... Qg6 37. Rxb6 $1 Qxh6 38. Qe7+ $3 Bxe7 39. fxe7+ Kxe7 40.
Rxh6) (36... Bd7 37. Rxb6 $1 Bxb6 ({or} 37... Re8 38. Re6 $1 Bxe6 39. dxe6 Rac8
40. e7+ Kg8 41. Qg5+ Kh8 42. e5 Bxe7 43. Qg7+ $1 Qxg7 44. hxg7+ Kg8 45. c5 $1
h5 46. Bc4+ Kh7 47. Bf7 $1 d3 48. Rf5) 38. Qd6+ Kg8 39. Qxb6) (36... Bd6 37.
Qg5 Qg8 38. Qg7+ $1 Qxg7 39. fxg7+ Kg8 40. c5 $1 bxc5 41. e5 $1 Bxe5 42. Rb7
Bd7 43. d6 $1 Bxg7 44. Bc4+ Kh8 45. hxg7+ Kxg7 46. Rf7+ {and Rxd7}) (36... Re8
$1 37. Qg5 Qg6 38. Rf5 $1 {, and the pawn avalanche sweeps away everything in
its path:} Bd7 ({not} 38... Ra7 39. Qf4 Rf7 40. Rf2 {and Rg5}) ({or} 38... Qxg5
39. Rxg5 Kf7 40. Rg7+ $1) 39. Qxg6 hxg6 40. Rg5 Kf7 (40... a4 $2 41. Rxg6) 41.
e5 Bf5 $5 {an idea of grandmaster Vadim Zviagintsev;} ({if} 41... Rxe5 42. Rxe5
Kxf6 {there is the decisive} 43. Rbe2 a4 44. g4 $1 Bxg4 45. Re8 Ra7 46. Rg2 $1
Bf5 47. Re6+ $1) 42. Bxf5 d3+ $5 (42... Rxe5 43. Bxg6+ Kxf6 44. Rxe5 Kxe5 45.
Re2+ $1 Kf4 ({or} 45... Kf6 46. Re6+ Kg5 47. Bd3 {and wins}) 46. Re8 $1) 43.
Kh2 $1 {Dvoretsky;} (43. Kf1 Rxe5 44. Bxg6+ Kxf6 45. Rxe5 Kxe5 46. Bxd3 Kd4 47.
Ke2 Re8+ $1 48. Kd2 Rg8 $1 49. h7 Rxg2+ 50. Kd1 Rg1+ {and ...Rh1 is not so
clear}) 43... Rxe5 44. Bxg6+ Kxf6 45. Rxe5 Kxe5 46. Bxd3 a4 (46... Kd4 47. Bb1
Kxc4 48. g4 $1) 47. h7 a3 48. Rd2 Kd4 49. Bb1+ Kc3 (49... Kxc4 50. d6 $1) 50.
Rc2+ Kb3 51. g4 {and wins.})) 35... Ke8 $1 {(5)} 36. Ra1 {The point of White's
plan. Now, in the event of the bishop retreating, the queen check will be
fully justified, but - the bishop is not obliged to retreat!} Qe7 $3 {This
brilliant defensive move was made by Petrosian almost without thinking.
White's attack peters out, since his rooks are stuck on the queenside.} 37. Qe6
$2 ({On seeing that the endgame after} 37. Qxe7+ Kxe7 38. Rxa4 Rd6 39. g3 {was
too depressing (although by no means lost:} Rg8 40. Kg2 Rxh6 41. Be2 {etc.), I
tried to confuse matters.}) 37... Rd6 $6 {(4)} ({'Petrosian is again equal to
the occasion: after} 37... Qxe6 38. fxe6 Bd7 ({Black is also better after} 
38... Bc6 $5 39. Rf2 (39. dxc6 $2 Rd6 40. c7 Rc6 $1) 39... Ke7 $1 40. Rf7+ Kd6
41. e7 Re8 42. Rf6+ Kd7 $1 43. Rxc6 a4) 39. exd7+ Rxd7 40. Rf2 {White would
have managed to save the game', I wrote in 'The Test of Time'. But now I am
not so sure:} Rf7 41. Rf5 Rxf5 42. exf5 Kf7 {followed by ...a5-a4-a3, ...Kf6
and so on.}) 38. Qg8+ ({Ignoring} 38. Qxe7+ {all the more.}) 38... Qf8 39. Qg3
$6 ({'After} 39. Qxf8+ Kxf8 40. Rxa4 Rxh6 41. g3 Kg7 42. Rh2 (42. Kg2 $5 {and
Be2 - G.K.}) 42... Rxh2 43. Kxh2 Kf6 {White's defence is difficult' (Petrosian)
. And yet objectively this would have given real drawing chances and was the
lesser evil!}) 39... Qxh6 $5 ({In time-trouble Black avoids the
alarming-looking} 39... Bd7 $1 40. Qxe5+ Kd8 $1 {, which would have given him
a chance of converting his extra piece:} ({but not} 40... Kf7 $2 41. Qg3 $1
Qxh6 42. e5) 41. Qg7 $6 Rxh6 42. Qxf8+ Bxf8 43. e5 Bc5 $1 {etc. Now, on the
other hand, not a trace remains of White's attack.}) 40. Rxa4 $4 {At
completely the wrong time!} (40. Re2 $2 Kf7 $1 {was also hopeless}) ({as was} 
40. Rf2 $2 Bd7 41. Qxe5+ Kf7 {with the decisive inclusion of the rook on a8.})
({But} 40. Qg8+ $1 Qf8 (40... Kd7 41. Qxa8 Qe3+ 42. Rf2 {with equality}) 41.
Qxf8+ Kxf8 42. Rxa4 {would have taken play into a somewhat inferior endgame of
the type that I could have entered on the 37th or 39th move.}) 40... Qc1+ {I
simply overlooked this 'long' move.} 41. Kf2 (41. Kh2 Rh6+ {.}) 41... Qxb2+ 42.
Kf3 Kf7 {. The time scramble ended with a cold shower for me! White resigned.
--- Times: 2.29-2.28. --- This was undoubtedly the turning point of the
tournament, since that evening Karpov crushed Timman and surged ahead with 6
out of 8. And the following day I conclusively 'fell out of step' - I failed
to win my adjourned game with Andersson. Apparently, after the dramatic loss
to Petrosian I did not have sufficient nervous energy.} (42... -- {In the 9th
round all the games were drawn, but in the 10th I gained an unexpectedly quick
win with Black: Geller, who had lost his previous form, blundered in an equal
position. But Karpov won against Smyslov, maintaining his lead of one and a
half points. I no longer had the strength to give chase, the result of which
was short draws with Balashov and Polugayevsky. --- By the will of the
pairings I played Karpov in the last, 13th round. Many fans had been hoping
that by that stage I would be only a point behind and that the game would have
great competitive significance. Alas, in reality the tournament intrigue was
exhausted: Karpov was still one and a half points ahead of his closest
pursuers and had already secured overall victory. Nevertheless I had the
desire to fight, but... 'The grand struggle, to which Botvinnik and I tried to
tune up the young grandmaster, did not occur', remembers Nikitin. 'The fact
that it was impossible to catch his opponent had a dampening effect on Garry,
and his very first intensive think ended in - an offer of a draw' (Game No.4
in Kasparov vs. Karpov 1975-1985). Before our marathon match, which began
three and a half years later, Karpov and I did not meet at the board again...})
(42... -- {At the end of the tournament I was surprised to hear it being said
that my result (a share of 2nd-4th places) was partly explained by good luck.
Taking account of the opportunities that were unconverted in the games with
Gheorghiu, Andersson and Petrosian, one could rather talk about bad luck. Or
more correctly - about a lack of experience of participating in
super-tournaments. An interesting point of view was expressed in the 64
magazine by Lev Polugayevsky: 'The proximity of Garry Kasparov and Vasily
Smyslov in the results table shows that in Soviet chess a happy period is now
approaching, when young talents are naturally developing and at the same time
veterans are still active. Such a competitive interaction is beneficial to
both sides. (Who could have thought that three years later Smyslov and I would
be fighting it out in the final Candidates match! - G.K.). --- 'During the
last two or three years, in our country a large group of able young players
has emerged, among whom Yusupov, Dolmatov, Psakhis and Kasparov stand out.
These lads are all very different; each has his own character and style, and
each has his own approach. Nevertheless, Kasparov's results are especially
impressive. --- 'Observing his play, you realise that he is not simply strong
and, as they say, that he has spent hours memorising opening theory. No,
Kasparov has made a profound study of chess history and has scrupulously
studied the games of the past masters. And this has impregnated his style, his
chess culture, and, of course, has brought him great benefit. From Kasparov's
games, from the versatile manner of his play, you sense what an enormous
amount of work the young Baku player has carried out. Garry's natural element
is calculation and combination. But also he does not avoid a painstaking
positional struggle. --- 'Kasparov has undoubtedly achieved great, very
significant successes, and has demonstrated original and interesting play.
However, I think it is premature to assert, as some careless voices do, that
Kasparov is now almost ready to fight for the world championship. I think it
is wrong to do this. In my view, in the play of the young grandmaster there
are still numerous gaps, which he needs to work hard to eliminate. Also
important, in particular, is how the young player will pass the test of fame.
This important factor has to be remembered both by Kasparov himself, and by
those who are able to influence him. How he manages to define his position,
whether he will be self-critical and objective in his searches - it is on this
that his further successes largely depend.'}) (42... -- {Vitaly Melik-Karamov:
'In the world there are now 166 international grandmasters, and the youngest
among the elite players is the 18-year-old Baku student Garry Kasparov. He has
grown up considerably over the past year and has become a sturdy young man.
Not much has been written about him yet, but people talk and argue about him
constantly. He looks like a quite normal youth - you will not find any signs
of genius in him. He has a slight stoop, he walks quickly, and he likes a joke
- in general, nothing special. Just like many others. Only, he has a fantastic
gift for chess. "He is the Mozart of chess", a journalist acquaintance said to
me.'}) 0-1

[Event "?"]
[Site "?"]
[Date "????.??.??"]
[Round "?"]
[White "Audacious Challenge"]
[Black "?"]
[Result "*"]
[Annotator "Garry Kasparov"]
[PlyCount "1"]
[EventDate "1984.??.??"]
[SourceDate "2009.12.07"]

{USSR Team Championship, Second Division (Moscow, 16-30 May 1981): 1. Russian
Federation-2 - 49 out of 72; 2. Moscow-2 - 47½; 3. Ukraine-2 - 42 (all hors
concours); 4. Lithuania - 40½; 5. Armenia - 39; 6. Kazakhstan - 38½; 7.
Azerbaijan - 34; 8. Kirgizia - 25; 9. Tadzhikistan - 23½; 10. Turkmenistan -
21. Tournament of top boards: 1. Kasparov - 6½ out of 9.} 1. -- {The Second
Division of the 1981 USSR Team Championship, in which the Azerbaijan team
participated, took place in the new central trades union chess club, situated
in the Krylatskoe Sports Complex. I remember the light, spacious rooms,
excellent playing conditions - and the complete absence of spectators. Only
six grandmasters were playing, and so even on the top board I mainly played
against masters, and they, for quite understandable reasons, normally aimed
only for simplification and a draw. --- However, there were some rare
exceptions. In the 5th round I was paired against the 32-year-old Novosibirsk
master Anatoly Vaisser, a player with an interesting fate. Although he had a
degree in mathematics and physics, he nevertheless decided to devote himself
to chess, and after working as Psakhis's second at his 'gold' USSR
Championships (1980/81 and 1981), within a few years he himself became a
grandmaster. In the early 1990s he moved to France where he successfully
continued his chess career, and in 2010 he won the world senior championship!}
(1. -- {For both of us this was a crucial encounter. Three years earlier, on
the last day of the all-union qualifying tournament in Daugavpils (1978), when
I had made a quick draw and was awaiting the conclusion of the game of my
rival - Igor Ivanov, Vaisser and I played a blitz match. I won by a small
margin, but the King's Indian games, against which my opponent employed only
the Four Pawns Attack, almost invariably ended in failure for me. Now, of
course, I was fully prepared to meet the onslaught. But an unpleasant surprise
awaited me... --- Vaisser: 'A game with such a brilliant player as Kasparov
was a notable event in a master's life, and so I prepared especially
thoroughly for it. To score a win against the holder of one of the highest
ratings in the world was very tempting, but above all I wanted to play an
entertaining, fighting game.' He must have succeeded, since the magazine
Shakhmaty v SSSR published it - a rare occurrence! - with comments by both
players.}) *

[Event "53: USSR Team Championship, Moscow"]
[Site "?"]
[Date "1981.??.??"]
[Round "5"]
[White "Vaisser, A."]
[Black "Kasparov, G."]
[Result "0-1"]
[ECO "E77"]
[Annotator "Garry Kasparov"]
[PlyCount "81"]
[EventDate "1981.??.??"]
[Source "Everyman Chess"]
[SourceDate "2012.11.28"]

1. d4 Nf6 2. c4 g6 3. Nc3 ({In three other games from this tournament I had to
fight against} 3. g3 Bg7 4. Bg2 O-O 5. Nf3 d6 6. O-O -- ({, when neither} 6...
Nbd7 7. Qc2 c5 {(against Slutsky, 3rd round)}) ({, nor} 6... c5 7. -- (7. dxc5
dxc5 8. Qxd8 Rxd8 9. Ne5 Ne8 $1 {(against Vaganian, 7th round)}) ({, or} 7. Nc3
Nc6 8. dxc5 (8. d5 {(instead of 8 dxc5) leads to more complicated play:} Na5 9.
Nd2 a6 10. Qc2 Rb8 11. b3 b5 12. Bb2 bxc4 13. bxc4 Bh6 14. Ncb1 e5 $5 15. Bc3
Bd7 16. Na3 Rb4 $1 (16... Bg7 $6 17. Rab1 $1 {, Zaid-Kasparov, Leningrad 1977})
17. Bxb4 cxb4 18. Nab1 Qc7 $1 {with quite good play for the exchange 
(Timman-Kasparov, Tilburg 1981)}) 8... dxc5 9. Be3 Be6 $5 ({the usual reply is
} 9... Qa5) 10. Qa4 Nd4 11. Rad1 Bd7 12. Qa3 Nc2 13. Qxc5 b6 14. Qg5 h6 15. Qf4
g5 16. Qe5 Rc8 {(against K.Grigorian, 8th round) gave more than a draw.})))
3... Bg7 4. e4 d6 5. f4 O-O 6. Nf3 c5 7. d5 {'This sharp and little-studied
variation had already served me faithfully for 14 years. Here I was rather
expecting 7...b5, which Kasparov had already played once.' (Vaisser).} e6 {(5)}
8. Be2 (8. dxe6 {- Game No.74.}) 8... exd5 9. e5 $6 {(2) But here is a
surprise!} ({In the aforementioned blitz match Vaisser invariably followed the
main line -} 9. cxd5 {, and I replied} Re8 ({or} 9... b5 {.}) ({But now I had
prepared} 9... Bg4 {, for example:} 10. O-O Nbd7 11. h3 Bxf3 12. Bxf3 Re8 13.
Re1 Rc8 14. Be3 b5 $1 15. Nxb5 Nxe4 16. Bxe4 Rxe4 17. Nxd6 Rxe3 18. Rxe3 Bd4 {
with equality (Nogueiras-Kasparov, Barcelona 1989). In the objective
evaluation of 9 e5 - '?!' - the exclamation mark relates to the field of
psychology: Vaisser correctly reckoned that this exotic continuation would be
a surprise for me and that it would be unpleasant for me to have to change
tune (as my opponent put it, 'this slight change of "register" neutralises
Black's home preparation'). And the question mark, as we will now see,
reflects the purely chess strength of the move.})) 9... Ng4 $6 {(20)} ({'Black
swims into the net, although if he desired he could have practically forced a
draw:} 9... dxe5 10. fxe5 Ng4 11. Bg5 f6 12. exf6 Bxf6 13. Qxd5+ Qxd5 14. Nxd5
Bxg5 15. Nxg5 Nc6 $1 16. Nc7 Rb8 17. Nge6 Bxe6 18. Nxe6 Rfe8 19. Bxg4 Nd4 20.
O-O-O Nxe6 {(Vaisser-Petrushin, Dnepropetrovsk 1968). However, in a game with
Kasparov you don't have to fear that in the opening the opponent will go into
a drawn endgame.}) ({But if not 9...dxe5, then it is better to play} 9... Nfd7
10. cxd5 dxe5 11. O-O exf4 12. Bxf4 Nf6 {with complicated play 
(Nei-Polugayevsky, 34th USSR Championship, Tbilisi 1966).' (Vaisser)}) ({
However, the most forceful is} 9... Ne4 $1 10. cxd5 ({as it transpired,} 10.
Nxd5 Nc6 (10... dxe5 $5) 11. Bd3 f5 {f5 is not much better for White (San
Segundo-J.Howell, Gausdal 1986)}) 10... Nxc3 11. bxc3 Nd7 {with advantage to
Black (Nun-Smejkal, Sternberk 1962), but this old game went unnoticed, and the
variation became widely known only after Black's win in the game Li
Zunian-Gheorghiu (Olympiad, Dubai 1986), which found its way into 'Informator'
Volume 42.}) ({Theory was truly 'short-sighted' in regarding} 9... Ng4 {as the
best response to White's audacious 9th move. One of the justifications was the
variation} 10. h3 $2 d4 11. Ne4 Nxe5 $1 12. fxe5 dxe5 {, when Black's pawn
mass in the centre gives him the advantage (Beyen-Barczay, Olympiad, Havana
1966). However, White has a far more promising continuation.}) 10. cxd5 dxe5
11. h3 e4 12. hxg4 {(2)} ({This capture was not even considered by the
'Encyclopaedia of Chess Openings', which gave only} 12. Nxe4 Nf6 {with
equality.} ({'Apart from the simple 12...Nf6, also} 12... Re8 $5 {is possible'
(Vaisser).})) 12... exf3 13. gxf3 $1 {An interesting attempted improvement.} ({
The game Vaisser-A.Shashin (Odessa 1977) went} 13. Bxf3 Nd7 (13... Na6 $5) 14.
Kf2 {, and here instead of} Nf6 $6 {(which could have given White the
advantage:} 15. g5 $1 Ne8 16. Be3 {), Black could have equalised by 14...Re8!.
'Although I won that game, I was dissatisfied with the outcome of the opening
- more resolute measures are demanded of White: he must be prepared to
sacrifice to try and get at the black king' (Vaisser).}) 13... Re8 {(51) Here
I thought for a long time. At first it seemed to me that White's threats down
the h-file could easily be parried, and that the insecure position of the
white king would give Black good counter-chances. But on closer examination it
all turned out to be not so simple: the difficulties began to pile up one on
top of another, creating a veritable mountain of problems which was extremely
difficult to scale during the allotted time limit. I was quite unable to find
good squares for the development of my queenside pieces, and Black's position
ceased to appeal to me... --- I shouldn't have thought for so long over this
natural move!} (13... f5 $6 {(preventing f4-f5) would have led to a weakening
of the a2-g8 diagonal, which could have told after} 14. Be3 Re8 15. Qd2 {,
threatening d5-d6 and 0-0-0.}) 14. f5 $1 {(3) Now the queen's bishop will be
developed at h6, harassing Black's only active piece and, more important, the
only defender of his king - the bishop on g7.} Qb6 $6 {(26) In order to
somehow deflect the mounting attacking wave, Black puts the b2-pawn under fire.
In 'The Test of Time' I attached a question mark to the queen move, but it is
not altogether bad.} ({'The trappy} 14... Bd7 {with the idea of} 15. Bh6 $2 ({
would have been easily parried by} 15. Qc2) 15... Bxc3+ $1 16. bxc3 Bb5 17. Rh2
Bxe2 18. Rxe2 Qh4+ 19. Kf1 Rxe2 {and ...Qxh6, winning.}) ({but with the same
aim} 14... b6 $5 {made sense' (Vaisser).} 15. -- ({. And indeed,} 15. Bh6 $2 {
runs into} Bxc3+ 16. bxc3 Ba6) ({, but White can look for an advantage after} 
15. Ne4 $5 gxf5 16. gxf5 Bxf5 17. Bg5 Qd7 ({or} 17... Qc7 18. d6 Qc6 19. Be7)
18. Rg1 ({or} 18. Qd2) (18. Nf6+ $6 Bxf6 19. Bxf6 Qd6 {favours Black, despite
the loss of his King's Indian bishop})) ({, as well as with} 15. fxg6 $5 fxg6
16. Kf1 Ba6 17. Ne4 {(Fries Nielsen-Mortensen, Esbjerg 1985).})) ({I was also
not attracted by} 14... Nd7 15. Bh6 Bd4 {(?!)} ({although in this variation
things are by no means so clear after} 15... Bxh6 $5 16. Rxh6 Ne5 17. Kf2 (17.
fxg6 fxg6 $1) 17... gxf5 18. Qc2 Qg5 19. Rh5 $5 (19. Rah1 Qf4 $1 {with
equality, Ravisekhar-Thipsay, Indian Championship 1983}) 19... Qf4 20. Rg1 $1 {
(recommended by Ravisekhar), and now not} c4 21. gxf5+ Kh8 22. Nd1 $1 {(Stohl)}
Bd7 23. f6 h6 24. Rgh1 $1 Ng4+ 25. Ke1 $1 Nxf6 26. Rxh6+ Kg7 27. Qc3 {with the
initiative for White, but the cool-headed 20...Kh8!?}) 16. Qd2 {(c2) and 0-0-0.
}) ({Finally, even the unaesthetic} 14... gxf5 {was possible, for example:} 15.
-- (15. Bf4 Na6 16. Qd2 Nb4 17. O-O-O fxg4 18. a3 Bxc3 $5 {(forcing an amusing
draw)} 19. bxc3 Qa5 $1 20. Kb2 Nxd5 $1 21. Bc4 $1 Nb6 22. Bxf7+ Kxf7 23. Rxh7+
Kg8 24. Rh8+ $1 Kf7 $1 25. Rh7+ {with perpetual check}) (15. Bh6 {, and here}
Bxh6 ({but the unexpected} 15... Bxc3+ $5 16. bxc3 fxg4 {is stronger, with an
unclear game (Packroff-Grigorescu, European Correspondence Championship 1985)})
16. Rxh6 Qg5 17. Qd2 $1 Qxd2+ 18. Kxd2 {followed by Rah1 justifiably seemed
dangerous to me.})) 15. Bh6 $6 {(18) White pays no attention to the
opponent's 'pin-pricks' and continues carrying out his long-range plan. Even
so, he should have preserved his b2-pawn.} ({'} 15. Qc2 {was quieter, not
burning his boats, for example:} c4 {(otherwise Bh6)} 16. Bg5 Na6 17. O-O-O Nb4
18. Qd2 {- although Black has counterplay, White's threats are the more
dangerous' (Vaisser).}) (15. fxg6 $5 hxg6 16. Kf1 {(f2) also came into
consideration.}) 15... Qxb2 $2 {(16) I was aware of the danger threatening
Black, but I decided to be consistent and I took the pawn, thinking: perhaps
I'll be able to defend myself...} ({'} 15... Bxh6 16. Rxh6 Qxb2 {was not so
risky' (Vaisser), for example:} 17. Ne4 {(Stohl)} ({or} 17. Rc1 gxf5 18. Rc2
Qb4 {with double-edged play}) 17... Nd7 {.}) 16. Bxg7 Kxg7 {'The culmination
of the battle' (Vaisser). The abundance of attacking possibilities available
to White is immediately apparent, but I consoled myself with the thought that
by no means any move would win, and to sense the critical moment and find that,
perhaps only winning move, the opponent would need not to lose his head.} 17.
f6+ $2 {(24) And here he is in too much of a hurry... White cannot resist the
temptation to advance a further assault column up to the walls of the black
king's fortress.} (17. Ne4 {(?) would have been refuted by} gxf5 18. gxf5 Bxf5
{, when the bishop joins the defence of the denuded king.}) ({In such a
position one does not want to consider the modest} 17. Rc1 $1 {, but this move
would apparently have given White an irresistible attack (the threat is Rc2
and Qd2, or in some cases Qc1 or Qa1). 'To me it seemed insufficiently forcing,
but a thorough analysis established that Black has very difficult problems' 
(Vaisser). Here are some sample variations:} -- (17... Kg8 18. Rc2 Qb6 ({or} 
18... Qb4 19. Qc1 Qd4 20. Nb5 Qe5 21. Qh6 Na6 22. Qxh7+ Kf8 23. Qh8+ Qxh8 24.
Rxh8+ Ke7 25. f6+ Kd8 26. Rxe8+ Kxe8 27. Nd6+ Kf8 (27... Kd7 28. Nxf7 {-
Vaisser}) 28. Bxa6 bxa6 29. Rh2 Kg8 30. Re2 Bd7 31. Re7 {and wins}) 19. Qd2 Nd7
(19... Qf6 20. Ne4 Qe5 21. Qh6 Qg7 22. Qxh7+ $1) 20. Qh6 Nf8 21. Ne4 f6 22.
fxg6 hxg6 23. g5 $1 {and wins (Vaisser).}) (17... Nd7 18. Rc2 Qb6 (18... Qb4
19. Qc1 $1) 19. Qd2 gxf5 (19... Rh8 20. Qh6+ Kg8 21. Ne4 $1 {and wins}) 20. d6
$1 Re6 21. gxf5 Rxd6 22. Qg5+ Kh8 ({Vaisser gives} 22... Kf8 23. Rxh7 {, when
mate is not far off}) 23. Nd5 $1 Rxd5 24. Rg1 {and wins}) (17... gxf5 18. Rc2
Qb6 {given by Vaisser;} ({White's threats are very strong after} 18... Qb4 19.
Qc1 $1 f4 20. Kf1) 19. d6 $1 {, cutting off the black queen from the broken
kingside:} -- (19... Re6 20. Qa1 $1 (20. Nd5 Qxd6 21. gxf5 Re5 $1 22. f6+ Kh8
23. Ne7 $1 Qxd1+ 24. Kxd1 Nd7 {, given by Vaisser, is not so clear}) 20... Qxd6
({or} 20... Kg8 21. gxf5 Rxd6 22. Rg1+ Kf8 23. Nb5 $1 Rf6 24. Nc7 $1 Qb4+ (
24... Bxf5 25. Nd5 $1) 25. Kf1 Qd4 26. Qxd4 cxd4 27. Nxa8 {and wins}) 21. gxf5
Re8 22. Ne4+) (19... Qd8 20. Qd2 Re6 ({or} 20... Qf6 21. Nd5 $1 Qxd6 22. Qg5+
Qg6 23. Rxh7+ $1 Kxh7 24. Nf6+ Kh8 (24... Kg7 25. Nxe8+ Kh7 26. Qxg6+ {and Nc7}
) 25. Qh4+ $1 Kg7 26. Nxe8+ {with crushing threats}) 21. gxf5 Rxd6 22. Qf4 $1 {
, and the attack is bound to produce a win (Vaisser)}) (19... fxg4 20. Qd2 Re6
({or} 20... Bf5 21. Qh6+ Kg8 22. Nd5 $1 Qa5+ 23. Kf1 {Black loses
ignominiously after both} Re6 ({and} 23... Nd7 24. Rc4 $1 Nf8 25. Rxg4+ Bg6 26.
Nf6+ Kh8 27. Qxf8+ Rxf8 28. Rxg6 {'with a pretty mate, but, alas, I was
tempted by another possibility' (Vaisser)}) 24. Ne7+ $1 Rxe7 25. Rc4 $3) 21.
Qg5+ Kh8 22. Qh5 h6 23. Qxf7 {(threatening Qf8+)} Qd8 (23... Qxd6 24. Rd2) 24.
Ne4 Qg8 25. Qf4 $1 {.}))) 17... Kg8 $1 {(2)} ({'I thought that Black was
obliged to capture the pawn -} 17... Kxf6 {, when White gains the advantage by}
18. Ne4+ Kg7 (18... Rxe4 19. fxe4 {is also not fully satisfactory}) 19. Rb1 --
(19... Qe5 20. Qd2 {and} Kg8 $2 ({or} 20... h5 $2 21. gxh5 Rh8 22. h6+ {is bad
for Black' (Vaisser)}) ({the only move is} 20... Rh8 {, although here too after
} 21. Nxc5 Nd7 22. f4 Qc7 23. Ne4 Re8 24. Qd4+ Kg8 25. O-O {White has
unpleasant pressure}) 21. Qh6 Qg7 22. Qxh7+ $1 Qxh7 23. Nf6+ Kf8 24. Rxh7 {.})
({. Leaving the pawn on f6 was rather terrifying, but I thought that it could
not be taken because of the given variations. In fact} 19... Qd4 $5 {(instead
of 19...Qe5) is more or less adequate:} 20. Qc1 {(Vaisser)} ({or} 20. Qxd4+
cxd4 21. Rxh7+ Kxh7 22. Nf6+ Kh6 23. Nxe8 Nd7 {with a somewhat inferior but
defensible position}) 20... Rh8 21. Qh6+ Kg8 22. Rd1 Qe5 23. d6 Nd7 {. ---
After 17...Kg8 the white army only needs to make a last, decisive thrust, but
at this point intuition suggested to me that the worst was behind, and I began
to set my sights on the white king caught in the centre.})) 18. Qc1 $1 {(11) 
'The retreat of the king looked bad because of this reply, seemingly forcing
the transition into an ending favourable for White' (Vaisser).} ({It was not
possible to decide the game by a frontal attack -} 18. Ne4 {, for example:} --
(18... Bxg4 $5 19. Rb1 Qxa2 ({in 'The Test of Time' I considered only} 19...
Qe5 $2 20. Qd2 Nd7 21. Qh6 Nxf6 22. Nxf6+ Qxf6 23. Qxh7+ Kf8 24. Qh8+ {winning
a piece}) 20. Rxb7 Nd7 21. fxg4 Rxe4 22. Rxd7 Qa3 $1 {with perpetual check
after} 23. O-O Qg3+ 24. Kh1 Qh3+ {(Stohl)}) (18... Nd7 $1 19. Rb1 Qe5 ({after
Stohl's move} 19... Qxa2 $5 {the momentum is maintained by} 20. Rh4 $1) 20. Qd2
Nxf6 21. Qh6 b6 ({or} 21... Nxd5 $5 22. Qxh7+ Kf8 {- Stohl}) 22. g5 (22. Nxf6+
$6 {is weaker in view of} Qxf6 23. Qxh7+ Kf8 24. Qh8+ Ke7 $1) 22... Nxe4 23.
Qxh7+ Kf8 {, and White's offensive peters out. --- Instead of this Vaisser
offers to go into an endgame, where the opponent's retarded development and
the strong pawn on f6 will be factors 'voting' in favour of White. But now it
is his turn to be surprised!})) 18... Qb4 $1 {(11)} (18... Qxc1+ {would have
been faint-hearted}) ({as would the exchange sacrifice} 18... Rxe2+ $6 19. Nxe2
Qxf6 {- after} 20. Qc3 $1 Nd7 21. Qxf6 Nxf6 22. Nf4 {White's chances are
better.}) ({'I did not even consider the retreat of the queen. The pawn at f6,
the half-open h-file, the queen ready to leap in at h6, the opponent's pieces
undeveloped, White to move - and to think that with all this there shouldn't
be a mate?!' (Vaisser). It has to be agreed that} 18... Qb4 {seems suicidal,
but} 19. Qh6 $2 {, creating two deadly threats, can be parried by Black:} Qxc3+
20. Kf2 Qd4+ 21. Kg3 Qe5+ 22. f4 Qxf6 23. Qxh7+ Kf8 24. Bf3 Bd7 $1 {. --- Here
I also made a psychologically winning 'move': I stood up from the board and
began strolling about as though nothing had happened, although for the 22
moves to the time control I had only 11 minutes left! And my opponent became
agitated...}) 19. Kf1 $2 {(9) In continuing his quest for the holy grail,
White imperceptibly oversteps the fatal mark. He should have readjusted and,
rejecting any ambitious plans, reconciled himself to equality.} ({The
commentators considered two continuations:} 19. Qd2 Nd7 ({after Vaisser's
suggestion} 19... Qd4 {there is the good reply} 20. Rc1 {and Ne4}) 20. Rb1 Qd4
{, and now one of two options:} 21. -- (21. Qxd4 cxd4 22. Ne4 Re5 $5 (22... Nb6
{is no better:} 23. Rh4 $1 Nxd5 24. Kd2 {and Rbh1 with counterplay}) ({or my
earlier variation} 22... d3 23. Bxd3 Nxf6 24. Kf2 {'with a probable draw',
which I should like to improve: if} Nxd5 {the correct reply is} 25. Bc4 $1 Rxe4
26. fxe4 Nc3 27. Rb4 $1 Nxe4+ 28. Ke3 {etc.}) 23. Kf2 Nb6 (23... Rxd5 24. Bc4
$1) 24. Rh4 $1 Nxd5 25. Rbh1 h5 26. gxh5 Rxh5 27. Rxh5 gxh5 28. Rxh5 Be6 29.
Rg5+ Kh7 30. Rg7+ Kh6 31. Ng5 Nxf6 32. Nxe6 fxe6 33. Rxb7 Nd5 34. Rd7 {with a
draw}) (21. Ne4 $1 Rxe4 (21... Qxd2+ 22. Kxd2 Nb6 23. Rh4 $1 {with the threat
of Rbh1}) 22. fxe4 Qxe4 23. O-O Nxf6 {(Stohl)} 24. Rbe1 $1 Qe5 ({not} 24...
Bxg4 $2 25. Bd1 $1) ({or} 24... Qxd5 25. Qf4 $1) 25. Bc4 Qg3+ 26. Qg2 {with an
initiative, compensating for the material deficit})) (19. Rb1 Qd4 20. Ne4 Nd7
21. Qh6 (21. Qf4 b6) 21... Nxf6 22. Nxf6+ $1 ({Vaisser's move} 22. Rd1 {(?) is
incorrect because of} Qb4+ $1 23. Kf1 Rxe4 $1 24. fxe4 Qxe4 25. Rh4 Bxg4 26.
Bxg4 Nxg4 27. Qxh7+ Kf8) 22... Qxf6 23. Qxh7+ Kf8 24. d6 $1 Qxd6 25. Qh6+ Ke7
26. Qg5+ Qf6 27. Qxc5+ Qd6 28. Qg5+ {with perpetual check. --- 'After moving
my king, I was full of joyful hope, especially as Kasparov had very little
time left on his clock. If only I could have foreseen my opponent's brilliant
rejoinder on the 20th move!' (Vaisser)}) 19... Nd7 {(2)} 20. Bb5 {(2) This
looks convincing - it appears that nothing can prevent the white queen from
occupying the cherished square;} ({but... 'In the light of Black's reply,
which dispels the illusion,} 20. g5 {was essential, with chances of resisting',
Vaisser concludes his commentary. However, after} Nb6 21. Qe1 Bf5 22. Rh4 c4 {
there were few such chances.}) 20... Qd4 $1 {(1) In fact Black has no
intention of defending his king, and he launches a counterattack, creating the
threat of ...Re3.} 21. Kg2 {(18)} ({The direct} 21. Qh6 $2 {would have run into
} Nxf6 22. Bxe8 Qxc3 23. Kg2 Bxg4 $1 (23... Qb2+ 24. Kg3 Qe5+ {is also not bad
- Stohl}) 24. Bxf7+ Kxf7 25. fxg4 Re8 {, and White has no defence.}) ({And if} 
21. Rh3 {(Stohl) the simplest is} Qxf6 {.}) 21... Re3 $1 ({This is far
stronger than} 21... Qxf6 $2 {, which after} 22. Rb1 $1 {would have given
White serious counterplay, despite the two-pawn deficit:} Rb8 23. Qh6 Qg7 24.
Qh4 $1 {etc.}) 22. Ne2 ({There is nothing else:} 22. Nd1 $2 Rxf3) ({or} 22. Re1
Rxe1 23. Qxe1 Nxf6 {and wins - Stohl.}) 22... Qe5 23. Kf2 Rxe2+ 24. Bxe2 Nxf6 {
We can assess the results of White's 'blitzkrieg'. His attack has come to a
halt, and the winning of the exchange offers little consolation. Black already
has two pawns for it, and in addition the exposed position of the white king
creates the conditions for various tactical operations.} 25. Qxc5 {(23) There
is nothing else.} ({Thus, if} 25. Rb1 {the bishop sacrifice would have given
Black an irresistible attack:} Bxg4 $1 26. fxg4 Ne4+ 27. Kf1 ({or} 27. Ke1 Qg3+
28. Kd1 Nc3+ $1 29. Kc2 Nxe2 {with crushing threats}) 27... Ng3+ 28. Kg2 ({if} 
28. Kf2 {, then} Re8 $1 29. Bf3 Ne2 $3 {- very pretty!}) 28... Nxe2 29. Qe1 (
29. Qh6 Nf4+ {, mating or winning the queen}) 29... Re8) 25... Bxg4 $1 {Here I
now had just 6 minutes left.} 26. Qe3 {(6)} ({If} 26. Rae1 {there could have
followed} Rc8 $1 {, for example:} 27. Qe3 (27. Qxa7 $6 Rc3 $1 28. Bd1 Qf4 $1
29. Rh4 (29. Re3 Bxf3 $1) 29... Rxf3+) 27... Qxe3+ 28. Kxe3 Nxd5+ 29. Kf2 Be6 {
with a won ending. To avoid the worst, White immediately goes into the endgame,
at least with an extra tempo.}) 26... Qxe3+ 27. Kxe3 Nxd5+ 28. Kf2 Be6 {Three
pawns for the exchange is a significant advantage, but White still retains
chances of saving the game.} 29. Rab1 {(5)} (29. Rh4 $5 {came into
consideration, with the idea of} Rc8 ({or} 29... Nc3 30. Bc4) 30. Rc4) ({as
well as} 29. Bc4 $5 Rc8 30. Bb3 {aiming for the exchange of bishops;} (30. Rac1
$2 Nb4 $1) 30... Rc5 {- in this case I would have had to choose between this
move,} ({and} 30... Kg7 31. Rac1 (31. Rhd1 Rc5 $1) 31... Rxc1 32. Rxc1 Kf6 {,
centralising the king with good winning prospects}) 31. Rac1 Ra5 {.}) 29... b6
30. Rbc1 Nf4 {By now Vaisser was also running into time-trouble: he had
roughly 10 minutes left.} 31. a3 $2 {(2) The final mistake: White allows the
exchange of his bishop for the knight.} (31. Rc7 Nxe2 32. Kxe2 b5 $1 {would
have been no better}) ({but} 31. Bc4 {was more resilient, with the idea of} Rc8
{(?!)} ({or} 31... Rd8 $1 32. Ke3 {, and nevertheless things are not
completely clear}) 32. Ba6 $1 ({but not} 32. Bxe6 $2 Nd3+ 33. Ke3 Rxc1 34. Rxc1
Nxc1 35. Bd5 Nxa2 {and wins}) 32... Rxc1 {(?!)} 33. Rxc1 Bxa2 34. Rc7 {(Stohl).
}) 31... Nxe2 32. Kxe2 b5 $1 {Now Black has a technically won position, and
his victory is merely a question of time.} 33. Rc7 a5 34. Rb1 Bc4+ 35. Kf2 a4
$1 {Such an 'anti-positional' arrangement of the pawns is justified, since 'a
supported bishop is not inferior in strength to a rook' (one of Botvinnik's
memorable rules).} 36. Re1 Rd8 37. Re3 Rd2+ 38. Kg3 Kg7 39. f4 Rb2 40. Rc5 h5 (
{Or} 40... Rb3 41. Rce5 h5 {.}) 41. Kh4 {Here the game was adjourned and White
sealed this move.} (41. Kh4 {Black has two clear ways to his goal, and the
choice between them is a matter of taste. The first is} Be6 ({the second
involves exploiting the weakness of the white pawns:} 41... Rb3 42. Rg3 Rb1 $1
43. Re3 Rg1 $5 44. Rg3 (44. Rg5 Rf1 45. Kg3 f5 $1 {, cutting off the rook from
the queenside}) 44... Rf1 45. f5 Rh1+ $1 46. Kg5 f6+) 42. Kg3 b4 43. axb4 Rxb4
44. Ra5 h4+ 45. Kxh4 Rxf4+ 46. Kg3 Rb4 {(d4), and the three passed pawns
decide the outcome. --- On encountering Vaisser the next day, I informed him
of these plans, and he decided not to suffer in vain. White resigned without
resuming. --- Times: 2.21-2.29.}) (41. -- {A very interesting and dynamic game.
28 years later Anatoly Vaisser had this to say in an interview on his 60th
birthday: 'One of my most memorable games was played in the 1981 USSR Team
Championship in the Russia-2 v. Azerbaijan match against Kasparov. There is an
amusing story associated with it. As it later transpired, in the event of a
draw I would have shared 1st place with Kasparov on our board. I was asked
before the game whether I would play for a draw with White. I replied: "No!
What for? I will simply play! I want to gain pleasure from playing against a
great player!" That was how I set my objective - not to play for a win, but to
play chess. And it turned out excellently: at the board I found a novelty, and
by the 17th move I was winning; moreover, I was playing easily, whereas he, by
contrast, was under some incredible strain... --- 'It all became clear after
the game. Garik told me that a pretty girl playing for one of the teams, who
half the players, including himself, had been courting, decided to play a joke
on him. She heard me speaking about my intention to play, "exaggerated" what I
had said, and before the round informed him that I had allegedly announced
publicly that I would beat him. One can understand Kasparov's feelings: he was
already one of the strongest players in the world, and here some little-known
master had made such an audacious declaration! --- 'And then in that
favourable situation, when I had an hour and a half left on my clock, whereas
he had only about 10 minutes, I committed an unpardonable mistake: I decided
that matters were settled. It appeared that the game would win itself: Black
no longer had his dark-square bishop, a white pawn would go to f6 and then the
queen to h6... But on no account should the greats be underestimated! Kasparov
found a brilliant defence, after two inaccuracies by me there was no longer a
mate, and on the board was a better endgame for Black. Despite my defeat, this
game is precious to me. It is also a memorable one for Kasparov. As he put it,
in those years it was usually sufficient for him to use 70% of his
capabilities at the board, but here he had to apply all 100%.'}) 0-1

[Event "?"]
[Site "?"]
[Date "????.??.??"]
[Round "?"]
[White "Confirmation of Class"]
[Black "?"]
[Result "*"]
[Annotator "Garry Kasparov"]
[PlyCount "1"]
[EventDate "1984.??.??"]
[SourceDate "2009.12.07"]

{3rd World Under-26 Team Championship (Graz, 17-29 August 1981): 1. USSR - 32½ out of 44; 2. England - 30½; 3. Hungary - 28½; 4. USA - 26½; 5-6
France and Israel - 24½; etc. (altogether 34 teams). The winning team
comprised Kasparov (9/10), Psakhis (6½/9), Yusupov (6/9), Dolmatov (4½/7),
reserves Kochiev (1½/3) and Vladimirov (5/6).} 1. -- {Before this Student
World Team Championship few had doubts about the success of the Soviet team,
which was made up of top-class players and was probably also capable of
contending for the medals in the adult Olympiad. Judging by the average
ratings, our main rivals looked to be the Americans with five international
masters, and the English led by grandmaster Jonathan Speelman - the winners of
the first championship (1978). --- Before the start we experienced hardly any
of the usual anxiety: it appeared that everything should go smoothly and that
the main 'problem' would be deciding on the daily team line-up. But in sport
all sorts of surprises are possible, especially in a competition run on the
Swiss System... --- In the 1st round, as is usual in such cases, the
favourites were paired against middle-ranking teams. We were opposed by the
home team, from Austria. I had White against the national master Arne Dür and
I was the first to finish my game (see the following game). It turned out to
be a straightforward one, although it was a good illustration of my opening
searches of those times and my striving to get away from classical principles,}
*

[Event "54: Student World Team Ch., Graz"]
[Site "?"]
[Date "1981.08.17"]
[Round "1"]
[White "Kasparov, G."]
[Black "Dür, A."]
[Result "1-0"]
[ECO "D55"]
[Annotator "Garry Kasparov"]
[PlyCount "49"]
[EventDate "1981.??.??"]
[Source "Everyman Chess"]
[SourceDate "2012.11.28"]

1. d4 Nf6 2. c4 e6 3. Nc3 {(5)} d5 4. Nf3 Be7 5. Bg5 {(3)} O-O 6. e3 h6 (6...
Nbd7 7. Qc2 c5 8. O-O-O {- Game No.33.}) 7. Bxf6 {(2)} ({After testing} 7. Bh4
b6 8. Qc2 Bb7 9. Bxf6 Bxf6 10. cxd5 exd5 11. O-O-O {(Game No.41), I became
fascinated by a different variant on my favourite plan with the exchange on f6,
queenside castling, and a subsequent attack on the kingside.}) 7... Bxf6 8. Qd2
{Following my April game with Karpov (Moscow 1981).} ({Before it Nikitin and I
had made a serious study of} 8. Qb3 c6 9. h4) ({but we came to the conclusion
that for the attack on the kingside 8 Qd2 was sounder (but later I also tried} 
8. Qc2 {- Game No.92).}) 8... c6 {(3) A standard, but passive reply.} ({
Karpov played} 8... Nc6 {against me (Game No.4 in 'Kasparov vs. Karpov
1975-1985')}) ({but in the mid-1980s the best was deemed to be Portisch's idea
} 8... dxc4 $1 9. Bxc4 Nd7 {and ...c7-c5 (Game No.58 in 'Kasparov vs. Karpov
1975-1985') - this relieving manoeuvre fully neutralised the move 8 Qd2.}) 9.
h4 $1 {(3) Exploiting the fact that it is difficult for Black to create
counterplay in the centre and on the queenside, White begins storming the
king's fortress and threatens to open lines by g2-g4-g5. Subsequently 8...c6
almost went out of use, precisely because of 9 h4.} Nd7 $6 {(17) A routine
response, which is not surprising: in a few rare games from the 1960s, after
this move only 10 0-0-0 had been played, allowing Black time for 10...Be7 or
10...g6! 11 g4 Bg7.} ({To avoid the immediate opening of the kingside,} 9... g6
$1 10. g4 Bg7 {should have been played, when after} 11. g5 ({but after} 11. Ne5
c5 (11... dxc4 12. Bxc4 c5 13. O-O-O {with the intention of h4-h5 the
initiative is nevertheless with White,} ({or} 13. f4)) 12. cxd5 exd5 13. Be2 $1
Nc6 14. f4) 11... h5 {Black's defences are solid enough (Spassky-Cvetkovic,
Lugano 1984).}) 10. g4 $1 {A novelty, which stunned my opponent. At a training
session for the Soviet team before the student world championship I won a
number of blitz games with this dashing attack, mainly against Vladimirov 
('regretfully', he even began delaying castling - 5...h6 6 Bxf6 Bxf6 7 e3 c6,
after which I now played 8 Qc2!, not fearing ...c7-c5).} Re8 $6 {(9) Another
routine move.} ({White is better after} 10... g6 11. g5 $1 hxg5 12. hxg5 Bg7 (
12... Bxg5 $2 {is bad:} 13. Nxg5 Qxg5 14. O-O-O {followed by f2-f4, Qh2, Bd3
and Rdg1, winning - Psakhis}) 13. O-O-O Qe7 ({not} 13... b5 $2 14. cxb5 {,
Psakhis-Bönsch, Lvov 1984}) 14. Rh4 $1 (14. e4 b5 {is now unclear,
Tukmakov-Shmirin, Simferopol 1983}) 14... b6 15. e4 {etc.}) ({But it was still
possible to guard against the opening of lines, by playing} 10... Be7 {with
the idea of} 11. g5 ({however, at e7 the bishop is less well posted than at g7,
and after} 11. O-O-O {Black stands passively (Polugayevsky-C.Hansen, Plovdiv
1983)}) 11... h5 {.}) 11. O-O-O {(3)} ({The immediate} 11. g5 $1 {was more
accurate, but I sensed that after 10...Re8 all the same the opponent would not
play} Be7 {- and I was not mistaken!}) 11... b5 $2 {(16) 'Black is rattled
and he decides to give up a pawn in the hope of counterplay. But he is not
able to exploit the opening of the b-file, and the white bishop at b5 occupies
an attacking position' (Bykhovsky).} ({Of course,} 11... Be7 12. g5 h5 {was
essential, although Black has lost time and his prospects are poor.}) 12. cxb5
cxb5 {(7)} ({Or} 12... c5 13. g5 hxg5 14. hxg5 Bxg5 15. Nxg5 Qxg5 16. f4 Qf6
17. Qh2 g6 18. f5 $1 {and White wins.}) 13. Bxb5 Rb8 $2 {(7) This fails
completely.} (13... Be7 14. g5 h5 {was more resilient, although here, apart
from the quiet} 15. Qc2 {(and if 15...g6, then 16 Ne5 Kg7 17 e4),} ({there is
the strong breakthrough} 15. g6 $5 fxg6 16. Rdg1 {with an overwhelming
position.})) 14. g5 $1 {White's further play is obvious: he checkmates the
defenceless black king.} hxg5 {(5)} 15. hxg5 Bxg5 16. Nxg5 {(5)} Qxg5 17. f4
Qf6 {(9)} 18. Qh2 {(4)} g6 {(12)} ({If} 18... Kf8 {both} 19. f5 $1 ({and} 19.
e4 $1 dxe4 20. d5 $1 {would have been decisive}) 19... Ke7 20. Rdf1 {.}) 19. f5
$1 {(1) This concludes matters. 'Into a three-fold attack! However, the pawn
is invulnerable' (Bykhovsky).} Qg7 {(20)} ({The alternatives were also
hopeless:} 19... gxf5 20. Rdg1+ Kf8 21. Qd6+ Re7 22. Nxd5) (19... exf5 20. Nxd5
{(the simplest)} Qg7 21. Bxd7 Bxd7 22. Ne7+ Rxe7 (22... Kf8 23. Qd6) 23. Qxb8+
{.}) 20. fxe6 (20. fxg6 $5 {.}) 20... fxe6 21. Rdg1 (21. Bd3 $5 g5 22. Rdg1 {.}
) 21... Rf8 {(6)} 22. Bd3 Rf6 {(6)} 23. e4 {(7)} ({Here my eyes were rather
dazzled: captures on g6 and} 23. Rg4 {were also good.}) 23... e5 {(13)} 24.
Nxd5 Rf7 25. Rxg6 {. Times: 0.50-2.21. --- Dolmatov also won, but in his
opponent's time-trouble Psakhis unexpectedly blundered, and as a result we
only defeated the Austrians 2½-1½. Thus the USSR team immediately fell one
and a half points behind eight teams (including England), which had begun the
championship with a 4-0 win. Our pleasant dreams of an 'easy stroll' were
dispelled.} (25. -- {In the 2nd round it was only with enormous difficulty
that we managed to snatch a 2½-1½ win over the Yugoslav team (I won
spectacularly against Klaric, but Dolmatov suddenly lost to Dizdar), whereas
the English maintained their tempo and defeated the strong Brazilian team by a
clean score. After two rounds we were in the middle of the tournament table
and the gap was already three points. --- However, for the moment there was no
reason to lose heart. In the next two rounds the Soviet team crushed both the
Canadians and the French 3½-½ (I won against Morrison and made a draw with
Kouatly), but the English also scored big wins - over the strong Swedish team 
(3½-½) and the USA (3-1), so that the gap was reduced by just half a point.
--- All we could do was pin our hopes on the individual meeting. This is what
the trainer of our team, Anatoly Bykhovsky, had to say: 'The 5th round
USSR-England match was the culmination of the championship. In the event of a
draw, or even a loss by the minimal margin, the English would have had very
good chances of the gold medals. As for us, only a convincing victory would do.
There are matches which one never forgets, and this was one of them. All four
of our players battled with great fervour, and with an enormous will-to-win'.
--- And we achieved our aim! Despite committing some inaccuracies, I was able
to overcome the tenacious resistance of Jonathan Speelman (see the following
game).}) 1-0

[Event "55: Student World Team Ch., Graz"]
[Site "?"]
[Date "1981.08.21"]
[Round "5"]
[White "Speelman, J."]
[Black "Kasparov, G."]
[Result "0-1"]
[ECO "A30"]
[Annotator "Garry Kasparov"]
[PlyCount "140"]
[EventDate "1981.??.??"]
[Source "Everyman Chess"]
[SourceDate "2012.11.28"]

1. Nf3 Nf6 2. c4 c5 3. Nc3 e6 4. g3 b6 5. Bg2 Bb7 6. O-O Be7 7. b3 O-O 8. Bb2
d6 9. e3 {(16)} Nbd7 10. d4 {(5)} a6 {(3)} 11. Rc1 ({Smyslov's} 11. Qe2 {(Game
No.49) is far more natural. Speelman's move allows me to carry out an
interesting and unexpected counterblow.}) 11... b5 $1 {(16) If now White does
not undertake anything, after ...b5xc4 and ...c5xd4 the slight weakness of the
central white pawns will give Black good play.} 12. d5 {(13)} ({Speelman, who
had no objection to a draw, considered the variation} 12. dxc5 Nxc5 13. cxb5
axb5 14. Nxb5 Rxa2 15. Bxf6 -- ({, with the idea of} 15... gxf6 16. b4) ({,
but he rejected it because of} 15... Bxf6 $1 16. Nxd6 (16. Qxd6 Nxb3) 16... Ba6
$1 17. Rxc5 Be2 $1 18. Qb1 Rb2 {when White loses the exchange.} ({if} 18... Ra1
{, then both} 19. Qxa1 ({and} 19. Nxf7 {will do})) 19. Qc1 $1 (19. Nxf7 {is
also acceptable}) 19... Bxf1 $6 {, it is unfavourable for Black to play this
move;} ({and so there only remains} 19... Qxd6 20. Re1 Qd3 ({or} 20... Bxf3 21.
Bxf3 Rxb3 {with equality})) 20. Nxf7 $1 {, in view of this move} Kxf7 21. Bxf1
{with excellent compensation.})) 12... exd5 13. Nxd5 Nxd5 14. cxd5 Bf6 $1 {The
exchange of bishops favours Black: after it the e4-e5 breakthrough is hindered,
and in addition his counterplay on the queenside is facilitated.} 15. Bxf6 {(4)
} Nxf6 {The advantages of this capture are obvious - the knight exerts
pressure on the centre, but its drawbacks are less so - White will prepare
e4-e5, and in this case the knight is better placed at d7 (from where,
incidentally, it can also be switched to the queenside).} ({Therefore} 15...
Qxf6 $5 {came into consideration - on the long diagonal the queen could have
supported the pawn offensive ...a6-a5, ...b5-b4 and ...a5-a4.}) 16. Nh4 {(4)}
a5 {(11)} 17. e4 {(5)} Re8 18. Re1 {(3)} g6 $1 {(16) It is important to take
away the f5-square from the white knight.} ({The direct} 18... a4 $6 {would
have run into} 19. e5 $1 Rxe5 20. Rxe5 dxe5 21. Rxc5 {with the initiative:} e4
({or} 21... axb3 22. Qxb3 e4 23. Nf5 $1 {(when} Bxd5 $2 {is bad in view of} 24.
Rxd5 Nxd5 25. Bxe4 $1 {)}) 22. Nf5 $1 {.}) 19. Qd2 b4 ({And here} 19... a4 $6 {
is inaccurate because of} 20. b4 {.}) 20. a3 $6 {(14) A questionable decision:
in his desire to suppress Black's activity, Speelman advances a pawn in a
place where the opponent is stronger.} ({The logical continuation was} 20. f4
Qb6 (20... Nd7 21. Nf3 {, insisting on e4-e5}) 21. Kh1 a4 22. Qb2 (22. Rcd1
axb3 23. axb3 c4 $5) 22... Qd8 23. Rcd1 axb3 24. axb3 Ra3 {with double-edged
play.}) 20... bxa3 $1 {(9) Although weak, the a3-pawn remains alive in
certain variations, and may become dangerous.} 21. Ra1 {(3)} Qe7 $6 {(9) 
Black is carried away by the tactical complications, but here the queen may
come under attack by Nf5.} ({He would have gained somewhat the better chances
with both the quiet} 21... a4 22. Rxa3 Qa5 23. Qxa5 Rxa5 24. Rxa4 Rxa4 25. bxa4
Nxd5) ({and the sharp} 21... Qb6 22. Qg5 (22. Nf5 Bc8 $1) 22... Nd7 23. Rxa3
Re5 $1 {.}) 22. h3 $6 {(5)} ({The hasty} 22. e5 $2 {would have been parried by}
dxe5 23. d6 Qd7) ({and the preparatory} 22. f4 $2 {by} a4 $1 23. b4 $1 (23. e5
$2 {is totally bad because of} axb3 $1 24. exf6 Qxe1+ $1 25. Rxe1 Rxe1+ 26.
Qxe1 a2) 23... Rac8 $1 24. Bf3 ({if} 24. e5 $2 {there is a spectacular win by}
cxb4 $3 25. exf6 Qxf6 26. Reb1 ({or} 26. Qxb4 Qb2) 26... b3) 24... Qc7 25. b5 (
25. Rxa3 $2 Qb6 $1) 25... c4 {, and Black's trumps are higher.}) ({Instead of
this Speelman prepares 23 Re3 (and Rxa3), safeguarding himself against ...Ng4
and vacating the h2-square for his king. But this is too slow! The immediate} 
22. Rxa3 $1 {was far more energetic} -- ({, not fearing} 22... Bxd5 23. Raa1
Bb7) ({, or} 22... Nxd5 23. Raa1 Nf6 {. Now after} 24. Nf5 $6 ({but} 24. e5 $1
dxe5 25. Nf5 $1 {gives White counterplay sufficient for a draw:} gxf5 26. Bxb7
Rab8 27. Qg5+ Kh8 28. Bg2 {and Rxa5}) 24... gxf5 $1 25. exf5 Ne4 26. Bxe4 Bxe4
27. f3 Qf6 28. fxe4 Rxe4 29. Rxe4 Qxa1+ 30. Kg2 Qf6 $1 {Black remains a pawn
up.})) 22... Qe5 {(6) Aiming for a favourable endgame.} (22... a4 $5 {was
perhaps more natural, for example:} 23. b4 ({or} 23. Rxa3 Bxd5) 23... Rac8 24.
Rxa3 cxb4 25. Qxb4 Bxd5 26. Rxa4 Rc4 27. Qb5 Rxa4 28. Qxa4 Bxe4 {with an extra
pawn (} 29. Bxe4 d5 $1 {).}) 23. Rxa3 {(this is now forced: ...Qb2 was
threatened)} Qd4 $1 (23... Nxd5 $2 24. Nf3 {.}) 24. Qxd4 {(16)} cxd4 {Another
passed pawn - this time on the d-file! True, it too is weak, but it causes a
certain confusion in the opponent's ranks. Also important is the fact that it
is difficult for White to bring his bishop and knight into play - they are
tied down by Black's central pressure.} 25. Ra4 ({With a simple reckoning:} 25.
Ra4 Bxd5 26. Rxd4 Rab8 27. Ra1 {(e3)}) (25. Rd1 Nxe4 26. Rxd4 {looked sounder,
but after} Nc3 {(f6) White would still have had problems.}) 25... d3 $1 {(2)}
26. Rd1 $2 {(4)} ({After} 26. Rd4 Bxd5 ({it would appear that things are even
more unpleasant for him after} 26... Ba6 $5 27. Nf3 Nd7 28. b4 axb4 29. Rxb4
Rab8 30. Rxb8 Rxb8 {, when the d3-pawn is like a fishbone in his throat}) 27.
Rxd3 (27. Re3 $2 {is weak:} Bxb3 28. Rdxd3 ({or} 28. Rxd6 Nd5 $1 29. Rxd3 a4)
28... a4 29. e5 d5 $1) 27... Rab8 28. Ra1 Bxb3 29. Rxa5 Nxe4 {the fact that
the white rook is at d3, and not at d4 (as in the previous note) is important,
and the regaining of the pawn by} 30. Bxe4 Rxe4 31. Rxd6 {involves a risk:} Be6
$1 32. Kg2 ({or} 32. g4 Rb3) 32... Rb2 {- although the pawns are on one wing,
it is not so easy for White to make a draw.}) ({However, the lesser evil was} 
26. Nf3 Nxd5 27. exd5 Rxe1+ 28. Nxe1 d2 29. Ra1 $1 Rc8 30. Rd1 dxe1=Q+ 31. Rxe1
Rc5 32. Rd1 {with a somewhat inferior but tenable endgame.}) 26... Nd7 $1 {Now
Black's advantage sharply increases.} 27. b4 {(3)} ({The d-pawn proves to be
very hardy:} 27. Rxd3 $2 Nc5 $1 {.}) 27... axb4 {(3)} 28. Rxb4 Nc5 {(5)} 29.
Nf3 {(4) A belated return of the 'prodigal' knight.} ({If} 29. f3 {there is
the very strong reply} f5 $1 {with the idea of} 30. exf5 {(?)} g5 {, when
things are bad for White:} 31. Rg4 Kf7 32. Rxg5 Ra1 $3 33. Rxa1 d2 {and wins.})
29... Ra2 {(2)} ({Winning chances were also promised by} 29... Rxe4 30. Rxe4
Nxe4 31. Ne1 $1 Ra4 $1 (31... Nc3 32. Rxd3 Ra1 33. Rxc3 Rxe1+ 34. Kh2 Rd1 {and
...Bxd5 is weaker - as Tarrasch taught, 'all rook endings are drawn'}) 32. Nxd3
Nc3 33. Re1 Bxd5 {with an extra, passed pawn.}) 30. e5 {(5) In 'Informator'
and 'The Test of Time' I attached an exclamation mark to this move, although
the break in the centre rather resembles a desperate chance.} ({In the event of
} 30. Nd2 Bc8 $1 {White would have faced an excessively difficult defence:} 31.
-- (31. f3 Bd7 $1 32. Nc4 Ba4 33. Rd2 Rc2 $1 34. Bf1 Ra8 $1 {, and if} 35. Rxd3
Nxd3 36. Bxd3 {, then} Rc3 $1 {, winning}) (31. e5 Bd7 32. exd6 Ba4 33. Rc1 (
33. d7 Nxd7 34. Nb3 Nc5) 33... Rxd2 34. Rxc5 Re1+ 35. Kh2 ({or} 35. Bf1 Bd7 $1
36. Rd4 Rb2 37. Rxd3 ({things are no better after} 37. Kg2 d2 38. Rc7 d1=Q 39.
Rxd1 Rxd1 40. Rxd7 Rxd5) 37... Bxh3 38. Kh2 Bxf1 39. Rf3 Be2 40. d7 Bxf3 41.
d8=Q+ Kg7 42. g4 Rxf2+ 43. Kg3 Ref1 $1 {with a pretty win}) 35... Bd7 36. Rf4
g5 37. Re4 Ree2 $1 38. Rc1 Rxf2 {.})) 30... dxe5 {(4)} 31. Rc1 Rc2 $2 {(29) 
Returning the favour; with both sides now short of time, Black restricts
himself to transposing into an ending with four pawns against three on the
same wing.} ({After} 31... d2 $6 32. Nxd2 $1 Nd3 33. Rxb7 Nxc1 34. Ne4 {it is
now the white passed d-pawn that would become dangerous.}) ({Also nothing was
achieved by} 31... e4 $6 32. Rxc5 Ra1+ 33. Kh2 exf3 34. Bxf3 Re2 $1 35. Kg2 $1
{.}) ({But the cool-headed} 31... Ra5 $1 {would have placed White on the verge
of disaster:} 32. Rxc5 $6 ({or} 32. Nd2 Ba6 {etc.}) 32... Rxc5 33. Rxb7 e4 34.
Nd2 f5 {.}) 32. Rxc2 dxc2 33. Rc4 Nb3 {(4)} ({Little better was} 33... e4 34.
Nd4 {(e1)} Nd3 35. Nxc2 Bxd5 36. Rc7) ({or} 33... Nd3 34. Rxc2 e4 (34... Bxd5
35. Rd2) 35. Re2 f5 36. Nd4 Bxd5 37. f3 $1 Re5 {(e7)} 38. fxe4 fxe4 39. Nb5 {
and Nc3(d6), attacking the e4-pawn with all the forces.}) 34. Rxc2 Bxd5 35. Rc7
{With his flag hanging, White begins to lose control over the situation.} (35.
Nd2 $1 {was simpler, with a probable draw.}) 35... e4 {(2)} 36. Ne1 Nd4 37. Rd7
({The line given by me in 'Informator' was also acceptable:} 37. Nc2 Ne6 {
(after the exchange of this knight there is no hope of success)} 38. Rc3 {.})
37... Re5 38. Nd3 $2 {Clever, but insufficient: Speelman overlooks a tactical
nuance.} ({I thought that 'here it was not to late to return-} 38. Rc7 {', but
then} Bb3 $1 {is unpleasant, when Black dominates.}) ({Only after} 38. Kh2 $1 {
with the idea of} Kg7 $6 ({or} 38... Ne6 39. f4 $1 {would White have gained a
draw without any particular problems}) 39. Bxe4 {.}) 38... exd3 {(3)} 39. Bxd5
{Thus Black again has a passed pawn - already his third! The question is what
to do with it.} Kf8 $1 {In terrible time-trouble I managed to spot this pretty
winning move.} ({The opponent was obviously hoping for} 39... d2 $6 40. Bxf7+
Kf8 41. Rxd4 Re1+ 42. Kg2 d1=Q 43. Rxd1 Rxd1 44. Bc4 {with a draw.}) 40. Bc4 (
40. Bxf7 Re4 $1 {and the d-pawn can be stopped only at the cost of a piece.})
40... d2 41. Rxd4 {Here the game was adjourned, and two hours later it was
resumed.} Re1+ {The sealed move.} 42. Kg2 d1=Q 43. Rxd1 Rxd1 {(5) The
conversion of the exchange advantage does not present any serious problems.}
44. h4 {(2) One of our team - I think it was Vladimirov - suggested to me a
precise winning plan for Black: he must penetrate with his king into the
opponent's position, force f2-f4, advance ...h7-h6, ...f7-f6 and ...g6-g5,
then drive back the white king and create a passed pawn.} Rc1 45. Bd5 {(3) 
Strangely enough, two years later in my game with Nikolic (Niksic 1983) after
White's 40th move exactly the same ending was reached, except that the rook
was on c2 and the black h-pawn already on h6. Two moves before this the white
h-pawn had still been at h3, and I could have played ...g7-g5 (which would
have won easily), but I deliberately allowed h3-h4 in order to win in the same
way as against Speelman.} Rc5 46. Bb3 {(6)} Ke7 47. Ba2 {(3)} h6 48. Bb3 Rc7
49. Ba2 {(6)} Kd6 50. Kh3 Ke5 51. Kg4 {(6)} Ra7 {(2)} 52. Bb3 Rb7 53. Bd1 ({Or
} 53. Ba2 Ke4 $1 {.}) 53... Rb2 54. Kf3 Kd4 55. Be2 Rb3+ 56. Kg2 Kc3 57. Bf3
Rb5 58. Bc6 Rc5 59. Be8 Rc7 60. Kf1 Kd2 61. Ba4 Rc1+ 62. Kg2 Ke1 63. Bb3 Rc7
64. f4 Ke2 {With Nikolic a similar position arose three moves earlier. True,
my rook was on a7, and the white bishop already on d5, which induced my
opponent to play 62 h5, but here too after 62...gxh5 63 Bf3+ Ke3 64 Bxh5 Ra2+
65 Kh3 f6 66 Be8 Kf2 67 Kh4 Ra8 68 Bc6 Rg8 69 g4 Ke3 70 Kg3 f5 71 Bf3 h5 White
resigned.} 65. Bd5 Ke3 66. Ba8 f6 $1 ({Here it is all very simple, but with
his pawn on h5 Black would have had to play} 66... f5 {and after ...Rc2+ break
through with ...g6-g5. This ending is also won, but it is far more complicated
and demands deep analysis.}) 67. Kg1 Rg7 $1 68. Kg2 g5 69. hxg5 hxg5 70. fxg5
Rxg5 ({In view of} 70... Rxg5 71. Bb7 f5 72. Kh3 ({or} 72. Bf3 f4) 72... Kf2 {
. Times: 3.35-2.55.}) (70... -- {Back in 'normal time', Psakhis gained a
crushing win in excellent style over Mestel (who before that had won all his
games, and in the end finished with the best score on board two - 8 out of 10),
Yusupov displayed fine endgame technique, outplaying Plaskett in a
'dead-drawn' ending, and only Hodgson managed to hold out against Dolmatov.
And so, we won this key match 3½-½ - and burst half a point ahead! --- In
the next round, the 6th, the Soviet team had to endure another serious test:
the match with the USA team did not go well for us and ended in a draw (I beat
Fedorowicz, but Yusupov unexpectedly lost by blundering against Benjamin).
However, that day the shocked English went down to the Hungarian team - 1½-2½. The lead over our pursuers grew to a whole point.}) (70... -- {None of
the Soviet players lost any more games, and we finished very confidently. A
considerable role in this was played by the friendly atmosphere which
prevailed in our team. The constant feeling of unity and friendly support
enabled us to overcome all difficulties. --- In the 7th round we defeated the
Hungarians 2½-1½ (I drew with Groszpeter), in the 8th and 9th rounds we
crushed the Swedes and the Dutch 3½-½ (I won in quite good style against
Schussler and van der Wiel), and in the penultimate, 10th round, we beat the
Brazilians. There was a memorable finish to my game with the future
grandmaster Jaime Sunye Neto (see the following game), a participant in two
Interzonal Tournaments (in Rio de Janeiro 1979 he shared 5th-6th places).}) 0-1

[Event "56: Student World Team Ch., Graz"]
[Site "?"]
[Date "1981.08.27"]
[Round "10"]
[White "Sunye Neto, J."]
[Black "Kasparov, G."]
[Result "0-1"]
[ECO "D32"]
[Annotator "Garry Kasparov"]
[PlyCount "94"]
[EventDate "1981.??.??"]
[Source "Everyman Chess"]
[SourceDate "2012.11.28"]

1. Nf3 Nf6 2. c4 c5 3. Nc3 e6 4. e3 Nc6 5. d4 d5 6. cxd5 exd5 7. Bb5 Bd6 8.
dxc5 Bxc5 9. O-O O-O 10. b3 Bg4 11. Bb2 Rc8 12. Rc1 Bd6 13. Be2 Bb8 14. Nb5 Ne4
15. Nbd4 Re8 16. h3 Bxf3 17. Nxf3 Qd6 18. Qd3 Ng5 19. Rfd1 Rcd8 20. Kf1 Ne4 21.
a3 a6 22. Qc2 Ba7 23. Bd3 Qe7 24. Re1 Rd6 25. b4 Re6 26. b5 axb5 27. Bxb5 h6
28. Rcd1 Rd8 29. Qb3 Qd6 30. a4 Bc5 31. Re2 b6 32. Kg1 {In this position,
which is slightly better for White, my opponent offered a draw. However, I was
able to find a tempting way of attacking on the kingside. And, also taking
account of the fact that my opponent was somewhat short of time, I decided to
play on.} Ne7 $5 {Intending to play this knight via f5(g6) to h4, and the rook
to g6, with pressure on the enemy king. 'Kasparov's patent manoeuvre', wrote
Bykhovsky, having in mind my game with Tempone (Game No.44). 'The d4-square
only seems to be weakened. The white knight on this square will be prettily
placed, but that is all.'} 33. Nd4 (33. Nd2 $5 {.}) 33... Rg6 34. Bd3 Qd7 {(5)
So, the first threat has appeared - ...Qxh3.} 35. Kh1 ({The most accurate way
of parrying the attack was} 35. f3 $1 Ng3 36. Ree1 $1 {, forcing Black to
concern himself more with how to equalise:} (36. Bxg6 Nxe2+ 37. Nxe2 Nxg6 {is
equal}) 36... Ngf5 37. Rc1 ({or} 37. Qb5 Nxd4 38. exd4 Qxb5 39. axb5 Bb4 40.
Bxg6 Bxe1 41. Bxf7+ Kxf7 42. Rxe1 Ra8 $1 {etc.}) 37... Ra8 {. However, I would
have preferred the less specific 36...Rd6. But Sunye Neto avoids the slightest
weakening of his position.}) 35... Nf5 $1 {(3)} 36. Bxe4 $2 {(2) In
time-trouble White commits a serious positional mistake, based on overlooking
a tactical blow by the opponent.} ({Understandably, it was not easy to decide
on the audacious thrust} 36. g4 $5 {.}) ({But} 36. Bb5 Qc8 37. Nf3 Qe6 {would
have led to a roughly equal game}) ({while the simplest way of eliminating the
black cavalry was by} 36. Nxf5 Qxf5 37. Bxe4 Qxe4 38. f3 {with equality.})
36... dxe4 37. Red2 Nh4 $1 38. Ne6 $2 {This also leads to a swift catastrophe!}
({Only here did my opponent discover to his amazement that after the} 38. Nf3 {
(?) an unpleasant surprise awaited him:} exf3 39. Rxd7 fxg2+ 40. Kg1 Nf3# {
mate!}) ({Another knight discovery -} 38. Nf5 {(?) leads to the win of the
exchange, but after} Qxf5 39. Rxd8+ Kh7 {the white king is defenceless. What
then can be done?}) ({The only saving move was} 38. f4 $1 {- after} Qc8 {(e8)}
({or} 38... Rd6) ({(but not} 38... exf3 $2 39. Nxf3 {and wins) White's
position would merely have been somewhat inferior.})) 38... Qxd2 39. Rxd2 Rxd2
40. Nf4 Rg5 {(2)} 41. Kg1 {(7) Here the game was adjourned and I had to seal
my move. The surprise nature of it served as an overture to one of the most
beautiful combinations in my career. The resumption took place that same
evening.} Nf3+ $1 {(23) Highly spectacular;} ({although Black could also have
won by} 41... Bxe3 $1 42. fxe3 Nxg2 ({apart from} 42... Nf3+) 43. Kf1 Rg3 44.
Qb5 $1 Nxf4 45. Qe8+ Kh7 46. Qxe4+ Rg6 $1 47. Qxf4 Rxb2 {. --- In the
adjournment analysis I demonstrated various mating constructions to my
colleagues, and our whole team refined the possible variations.}) ({Or even} 
41... Bd6 {.}) 42. Kf1 ({In the event of} 42. Kh1 {another combination had
been prepared:} Bxe3 $3 43. -- (43. fxe3 Rdxg2 $3 44. Nxg2 Rg3 $1 {. A
fantastic position! Despite his enormous material advantage, White cannot
defend against the mate (} 45. Nf4 Rg1# {mate).}) ({. I have yet to come
across anything similar in a practical game. White would also not have been
helped by} 43. gxf3 Bxf4) ({, or by declining the sacrifices -} 43. Ne6 {,
after which I was planning} Rxf2 44. gxf3 (44. Qc4 fxe6 45. Qxe6+ Kh7 46. Qxe4+
Rg6 $1 {is also hopeless for White}) 44... Rf1+ 45. Kh2 exf3 $1 46. Nxg5 ({or} 
46. Qxe3 Rg2#) 46... Bf4# {mate! - again an amazing mating finish! --- Thanks
to these concluding events, performed with of a kind of special, distinctive
elegance, this game appealed to me more than any of the others that I played
in Graz.})) 42... Bxe3 $3 43. fxe3 {(7)} ({The acceptance of the sacrifice is
forced - after} 43. Ne2 {White would have lost his queen or been mated:} Nh2+
44. Ke1 (44. Kg1 Rxe2 {etc.}) 44... Rxg2 45. Qxe3 Nf3+ 46. Kf1 Rg1+ $3 47. Nxg1
Rd1+ {.}) 43... Rdxg2 $1 44. Qc3 {(2) The only defence;} ({if} 44. Qxb6 {,
then} Rh2 45. Ne2 Rgg2 {is immediately decisive. But now in this case White
has perpetual check on c8 and f5.}) 44... Rh2 45. Ne2 {(4)} Kh7 $1 {Renewing
the threat of ...Rgg2. Sunye Neto prevents it in the most primitive way and
overlooks one of the original mating constructions.} 46. Qc8 {(9)} (46. Qb4 {
, retaining control of the d2-square, looks somewhat more resilient. But in
this case too Black has a clear way to win -} f5 $1 {. For example:} 47. Qf8 (
47. Qd6 Rgg2) ({or} 47. Qb5 Rh1+ ({this is even better than} 47... f4 48. Qb4
Nd2+ $1 {and ...f4-f3}) 48. Kf2 Nd2 {(threatening ...Rf1 mate)} 49. Ng3 Rh2+
50. Ke1 f4 {with crushing threats}) 47... Rh1+ 48. Kf2 Nh4 49. Nf4 Rh2+ 50. Kf1
Rxb2 {.}) 46... Rh1+ {(3)} 47. Kf2 Nd2 $1 {With the threat of ...Rf1 mate.} ({
In view of} 47... Nd2 48. Ng3 Rh2+ 49. Ke1 Nf3+ {and ...Rxb2, White resigned.
--- Times: 3.07-2.30.}) (47... -- {The 3-1 score in the match with the
Brazilians put us practically out of reach: the English were 2½ points
behind us. In the final, 11th round for the first time I allowed myself to
relax, and victory over the West Germans (2½-1½) consolidated the success
of the USSR team. --- The English, by beating the Yugoslavs (3-1), finished
second - and left a strong impression. They made the best scores on three
boards (Mestel, Plaskett and Davies), whereas the Soviet team did this only on
two (Kasparov and Vladimirov; incidentally, we shared a room, and this was the
start of our close chess collaboration). At one time the American team was in
contention (the 16-year-old Joel Benjamin played well, achieving the best
result on the first reserve board), but because of a poor finish they even
finished without the bronze medals, which went to the Hungarian masters. --- I
was happy with my play in Graz: I created a number of interesting games, and I
achieved the absolute best result among all the participants. The role of
leader is undoubtedly an honourable one, but at critical moments a double
responsibility lies on his shoulders. For this reason I had to play for ten
successive rounds without being substituted.}) (47... -- {Bykhovsky: 'In Graz
the young grandmaster achieved a great creative success. Kasparov likes
complicated play. He sees a lot, he calculates accurately and deeply, he is
extremely inventive, and he has an excellent feeling for the dynamics of a
position. But the strongest aspect of his play, in my view, is his ability to
obtain complicated positions, and his ability to impose his play on the
opponent.' --- At that time the American master Eric Schiller gave a curious
pen-portrait: 'Kasparov's preparation just before the onset of the game is
intense. Arriving early at the board, he plunges into deep concentration, and
starts to get his juices flowing. The face which was calm and peaceful only
moments before becomes creased with tension... Away from the board it is quite
another matter. He enjoys blitz, although quickly bored when faced by weak
opposition. The consensus among some of America's finest blitz players was
that he is simply astounding. Garry told me that there is really only one
interesting blitz opponent for him - Karpov.'}) 0-1

[Event "?"]
[Site "?"]
[Date "????.??.??"]
[Round "?"]
[White "Tilburg Lessons"]
[Black "?"]
[Result "*"]
[Annotator "Garry Kasparov"]
[PlyCount "1"]
[EventDate "1984.??.??"]
[SourceDate "2009.12.07"]

{International Tournament in Tilburg (1-16 October 1981): 1. Beliavsky - 7½
out of 11; 2. Petrosian - 7; 3-4. Portisch and Timman - 6½; 5. Ljubojevic -
6; 6-8. Andersson, Spassky and Kasparov - 5½; 9-10. Sosonko and Larsen - 4½; 11. Hübner -4; 12. Miles - 3.} 1. -- {The super-tournaments in the small
Dutch town of Tilburg, which were held from 1977 to 1998, were among the most
prestigious in the world. There were ideal playing conditions and quite high
prizes. Therefore, even for an elite Soviet grandmaster, participation in such
a tournament was an exceptional event. And for me Tilburg 1981 was also an
important stage in my chess development. It gathered all the strongest
grandmasters, apart from Karpov and Korchnoi, who were in Merano playing a
match for the crown, and Tal and Polugayevsky (they were helping Karpov). ---
At the start I was paired against the 38-year-old Genna Sosonko (see the
following game), a highly colourful character on the tournament scene -
previously a Leningrad master, a second of Tal and Korchnoi, who after leaving
the USSR became one of the best grandmasters in Holland, twice champion of the
country and winner of the tournaments in Wijk aan Zee (1977 and 1981), and
also an excellent chess journalist and writer.} *

[Event "57: Tilburg"]
[Site "?"]
[Date "1981.10.02"]
[Round "1"]
[White "Kasparov, G."]
[Black "Sosonko, G."]
[Result "1-0"]
[ECO "D38"]
[Annotator "Garry Kasparov"]
[PlyCount "57"]
[EventDate "1981.??.??"]
[Source "Everyman Chess"]
[SourceDate "2012.11.28"]

1. d4 Nf6 2. c4 e6 3. Nf3 d5 4. Nc3 Bb4 {At that time Sosonko was one of the
few supporters of the Ragozin Variation - nowadays the leading players employ
it much more often.} 5. cxd5 {(5)} exd5 6. Bg5 {The natural reply.} h6 7. Bh4 (
{Leading to an open battle - none of your 'amorphous' captures on f6 (} 7. Bxf6
Qxf6 8. Qb3 Qd6 9. a3 Ba5 10. Qa4+ Nc6 11. b4 Bb6 12. e3 O-O {with equality,
Kasparov-Kupreichik, Minsk 1978).}) 7... c5 8. e3 g5 9. Bg3 Ne4 {Immediately
trying to exploit the pin on the knight at c3.} ({Now these sharp positions
are already a matter of course - Black plays both this, and even} 9... c4 {.})
10. Bb5+ {(5) A tempo-gaining developing move.} ({It is unfavourable to play} 
10. dxc5 $6 Nxc3 {(and if} 11. Qd4 {, then} Nxa2+ {and ...0-0)}) ({or} 10. Nd2
Nxg3 11. hxg3 cxd4 12. exd4 Nc6 {with equality (Rashkovsky-Taimanov, 41st USSR
Championship, Moscow 1973).}) 10... Kf8 $5 {This prepared novelty surprised me.
} ({And I stopped to think, since I had only been expecting} 10... Bd7 11.
Bxd7+ {, assuming that the weakness of the f5-square would promise White some
advantage.}) 11. dxc5 $6 {(15) An unexpected exchange sacrifice! I thought
that in return White would gain a fearfully strong attack, but I
underestimated Black's defensive resources.} (11. O-O $1 Bxc3 12. bxc3 c4 $1 {
was more logical. In the game I.Sokolov-Sosonko (Rotterdam 1998) there followed
} 13. Ne5 $5 ({a double-edged struggle also results from} 13. Qc2 Bf5 ({
Ribli's move} 13... Qa5 $2 {is bad because of} 14. Bxc4 $1) 14. Qb2 Kg7) 13...
Nxc3 14. Qh5 Qf6 {(?!)} ({after} 14... Be6 $1 15. f4 Rh7 $1 {no way for White
to win is apparent}) 15. f4 $1 g4 16. f5 Ne2+ (16... Nxb5 $6 {is weaker in
view of} 17. Bh4 Qg7 18. Ng6+ $1 Ke8 19. Ne7 {etc.}) 17. Kh1 Nxg3+ 18. hxg3 Rg8
19. Ng6+ $1 Kg7 20. Ne7 Rd8 {, and here} 21. e4 $1 {(Sokolov) would have given
a powerful attack:} dxe4 ({after Ribli's move} 21... a6 $6 {there is} 22. Nxd5
Rxd5 $6 23. Bxc4 $1) 22. Bxc4 Nc6 23. Nxc6 bxc6 24. Rf4 $1 Kf8 ({or} 24... Kh8
25. Rxe4 {etc.}) 25. Rxe4 {. --- So it is not altogether clear why 10...Kf8
went out of use.}) 11... Nxc3 {(11)} 12. bxc3 Bxc3+ {(30)} 13. Ke2 {(2)} Bxa1 {
(8)} ({Sosonko was rather shocked, but he nevertheless took the exchange,
which, in my view, is more critical than} 13... Qa5 14. a4 a6 15. Bd3 Nc6 {,
although here too there is nothing terrible for Black.}) 14. Qxa1 f6 15. h4 {
(3) This looked to be the most vigorous continuation.} ({Nothing particular
was promised by} 15. Bd6+ Kg7 16. Nd4 Bg4+ 17. f3 Bd7 18. Bd3 Nc6 19. Nxc6 Bxc6
20. h4 Qd7 21. Kf2 Bb5 22. Bc2 b6 {with equality.}) 15... g4 $6 {(6) The
first step towards the precipice.} ({Of course, Black should have preferred} 
15... Kg7 $1 16. hxg5 hxg5 17. Rxh8 Qxh8 $1 {(the threat of Nxg5 is illusory)}
18. Nxg5 Nc6 {, when he is alright: White has compensation for the exchange,
but not more (Genna informed me of this possibility the following day).}) 16.
Nd4 {(5)} Kf7 {(9)} 17. Bd3 {(10) With the intention of Nb5-d6. The situation
has rapidly changed to White's advantage. This was one of my main latent
superiorities: I had a very good feeling for the dynamics of such positions
with unbalanced material, whereas my opponents often hesitated for too long.} (
17. Bd6 $5 Bd7 {and ...Nc6 is unclear.}) 17... Nd7 {(20)} ({White also has an
easy game after} 17... Nc6 18. Nb5 {with the threat of an invasion on d6 (} Nb4
19. Qc3 {, as in the game). It is not easy for Black to defend: his king is
exposed, and the knight on d6 paralyses his entire defence.}) 18. Qc3 {(7)} Ne5
{(25)} 19. Nb5 {(2)} Qe7 {(9)} ({It is hard to offer any better advice: if,
for example,} 19... Nxd3 20. Qxd3 Qa5 $6 {, then} 21. Rb1 $1 ({but not} 21.
Qxd5+ $2 Kg7 22. Nc7 b6 $1 {with equality}) 21... Qxa2+ {, and Black is lost (}
22. Ke1 $1 b6 23. Nd6+ Kg7 24. h5 $1 {).}) 20. Nd6+ {(2)} Kf8 {(14)} ({Of
course, not} 20... Kg7 $2 21. Bf5 $1 Bd7 22. Bxe5 fxe5 23. Bxd7 Qxd7 24. Qxe5+
{etc.}) 21. Rd1 {(6)} b6 $2 {(5) Not yet sensing the impending danger,
Sosonko continues making positional moves.} (21... Nxd3 22. Qxd3 Be6 {was more
resilient, although after} 23. h5 ({or} 23. Rb1 {all the same things are not
easy for Black.})) 22. Bc2 $1 {(9) Now all White's pieces join the attack and,
to the unconcealed surprise of my opponent, the game quickly concludes.} Ba6+ {
(4)} (22... bxc5 23. Rxd5 Be6 ({or} 23... Nf7 24. Bg6 $1) 24. Rxe5 $1 fxe5 25.
Qxe5 {was also hopeless.}) 23. Ke1 Bc4 24. Nxc4 {(4)} dxc4 25. Rd6 $1 {(the
concluding stroke)} Re8 {(5)} 26. Bxe5 {(2)} fxe5 {(2)} (26... Qxe5 {was
slightly more tenacious, but after} 27. Rxf6+ Kg7 28. Rg6+ Kf8 29. Qxc4 bxc5
30. Qxg4 {Black also cannot hold out.}) 27. Qxc4 Qf7 ({If} 27... bxc5 {the
most forceful is} 28. Bb3 $1 {.}) 28. Qe4 $1 {(3)} g3 {(4)} 29. fxg3 {. Times:
1.31-2.18. --- In the 2nd round I had Black against Portisch, and again, as
six months earlier in Moscow, I chose the Modern Benoni Defence. And again I
sacrificed a pawn! On this occasion I was able to seize the initiative and
even land the spectacular blow 24...Nf3+!!, but Portisch found a way to save
himself and after an interesting struggle things ended in a draw. The result
was the same in a very complicated 3rd round game with Beliavsky. --- In the
4th round against Timman I played a well-known variation of the King's Indian
Defence with an exchange sacrifice and, after employing a strong novelty, I
gained sufficient counterplay (cf. Game No.53, note to White's 3rd move). But
I spoiled everything with the mediocre move 21...Nb7? - after it Black no
longer had compensation for the exchange. Timman accurately converted his
material advantage and, with 3 points out of 4, took the lead together with
Andersson. This loss was the beginning of my 'Tilburg sufferings'.} 1-0

[Event "58: Tilburg"]
[Site "?"]
[Date "1981.10.07"]
[Round "5"]
[White "Kasparov, G."]
[Black "Spassky, B."]
[Result "0-1"]
[ECO "E74"]
[Annotator "Garry Kasparov"]
[PlyCount "132"]
[EventDate "1981.??.??"]
[Source "Everyman Chess"]
[SourceDate "2012.11.28"]

{My first meeting at the board with Boris Spassky ended tragically for me. I
have to admit that I did not feel inhibited by the ex-world champion. I had 2
points out of 4 and was in a fighting mood: I believed (and not without
justification) that I would score many more points. And before the game I
cheerfully informed my opponent how it would end: I prepared him for the worst,
and in my usual, natural manner - with a laugh and even using not altogether
literary language. To which Spassky, also in his usual - 'Tolush-like' -
manner, grandly replied: 'I implore you to carry it out!'} 1. d4 Nf6 2. c4 c5
3. d5 g6 4. Nc3 {(5)} d6 5. e4 Bg7 {Spassky always made subtle choices in his
openings. I was somewhat startled that he should take the risk of playing a
King's Indian set-up that was very familiar to me. After some thought I
decided to choose the Averbakh Variation - perhaps not the most dangerous for
Black, but one that demands very energetic play and a detailed knowledge of
opening subtleties (which the opponent probably did not have!).} 6. Be2 {(9)}
O-O 7. Bg5 b5 $6 {(14) After some hesitation Spassky decided to sacrifice a
pawn in the spirit of the Benko Gambit, hoping to seize the initiative and
force White to defend accurately, i.e. to give the play a character that was
unpleasant for me.} ({Fischer employed} 7... e6 {(Game No.30 in Volume IV of
'My Great Predecessors')}) ({and I myself - the preparatory} 7... h6 {(Game No.
28).}) 8. cxb5 {(7)} a6 9. a4 $1 Qa5 $6 {(11)} ({The first subtlety:} 9... h6
$1 10. Bd2 $1 e6 {is better, as I played two months later against Tukmakov 
(Game No.67).}) 10. Bd2 $1 Nbd7 $2 {(21)} ({Here play on general grounds is
too passive: Black simply ends up in an inferior version of the Benko Gambit,
as is also the case after} 10... axb5 $6 11. Bxb5 {.}) ({The only chance of
confusing matters is} 10... Qb4 $5 {.}) 11. Ra3 $1 {(15) Now Black's activity
peters out.} Bb7 {(7)} 12. Nf3 axb5 {(5)} 13. Bxb5 {(18)} Qc7 {(11)} 14. O-O {
(2) White's position is already technically won: he is a sound pawn to the
good, without any counterplay for the opponent. Thus Spassky's venture had
failed. However, he carried on playing as though nothing had happened, with a
completely unperturbed appearance (which, I remember, made me laugh somewhat).}
Ng4 {(13)} (14... e6 $2 15. dxe6 fxe6 16. Ng5 Rae8 17. Bf4 e5 18. Bc4+ Kh8 19.
Nb5 Qb8 20. Nxd6 {was completely bad for Black.}) 15. Bg5 {(14) It is hard
not to make this move;} ({although the computer suggests} 15. a5 {.}) 15...
Ngf6 {(2) A pragmatic decision by an experienced campaigner! Black must hold
his ground, be patient, and wait - the opponent may over-press, or make a
second-rate move...} ({The variation} 15... Nde5 16. Nxe5 Nxe5 17. f4 Nd7 18.
Bxe7 Rfe8 19. Bg5 h6 20. Bh4 Bxc3 21. bxc3 Rxe4 22. c4 {would have led to a
decisive advantage for White.}) 16. Nd2 {(5)} e6 {(4)} 17. Nc4 $1 {(4)} ({
Things would have been far from clear after} 17. dxe6 fxe6 18. Nc4 (18. a5 $5)
18... d5 19. exd5 exd5 (19... Nxd5 20. a5) 20. Bxd7 Qxd7 (20... dxc4 $6 21.
Be6+) 21. Nb6 Qc6 $1 22. Bxf6 Bxf6 23. Qxd5+ (23. Ncxd5 Rad8 $1) 23... Qxd5 24.
Nbxd5 Bxd5 25. Nxd5 Bxb2 26. Ra2 Bd4 {with drawing chances.}) 17... exd5 18.
exd5 Rad8 {(13)} (18... Nb6 {did not work because of} 19. Nxb6 Qxb6 20. Qf3 $1
Nh5 21. g4 {and wins.}) 19. a5 {(3) An obvious plan for converting the
advantage. To this day I don't understand how I contrived to lose from such a
position!} h6 {(3)} 20. Bh4 {(3)} (20. Bf4 $1 {was better, and if} Ne5 {-} 21.
Nxe5 ({or simply} 21. Bxe5 $1 dxe5 22. d6 Qb8 23. a6 Ba8 24. Qa4) 21... dxe5
22. d6 $1 Qxd6 23. Qxd6 Rxd6 24. Bxe5 Re6 (24... Rd2 25. a6) 25. Bxf6 Rxf6 26.
a6 {, with a winning position in both cases. For the moment the move in the
game also does not spoil anything, although Black acquires a hint of
counterplay.}) 20... Ne5 {(3)} 21. a6 Ba8 {(3)} 22. Re1 {(4)} g5 {(2)} 23. Bg3
Nfd7 $1 {(opening the way for the f-pawn)} 24. a7 $1 {(11)} f5 {(4)} 25. Bxe5
Nxe5 26. Nxe5 dxe5 $5 {(6) A desperate chance;} ({after} 26... Bxe5 27. Qh5
Kg7 28. Ra6 $1 {with the threat of Rxe5 or the immediate 27 Ra6!? and Bc6
White would have won without any trouble. Now too the a7-pawn should decide
the outcome, but at least it is blockaded and Black still has hopes of
exploiting the power of his dark-square bishop.}) 27. Ra6 e4 {(3)} 28. Bc4 {(6)
} ({The computer recommends the 'crude'} 28. d6 $1 Qf7 29. Qe2 {(a4)} ({or} 29.
d7 {.})) 28... Qf7 (28... Qf4 $6 29. g3 $1 {.}) 29. Nb5 {(3)} Kh7 {(5)} (29...
Bxd5 $2 30. a8=Q Rxa8 31. Bxd5 {etc. is bad for Black.}) 30. Re6 {The
situation has clarified, and I began playing more enterprisingly: the knight
has defended the a7-pawn and the rook has invaded at e6. The finishing-off
stage has been reached and Spassky was already in severe time-trouble (perhaps
this was my undoing?).} Qb7 $1 {(5)} ({Black is not tempted by} 30... Qxe6 $2
31. dxe6 Rxd1 32. Rxd1 Be5 33. e7 Re8 34. Rd8 {.}) 31. Qh5 $6 {(7) The first
move that deserves more serious criticism.} ({I should have simply attacked
the e4-pawn -} 31. f3 $1 {, and the game would have concluded quickly, for
example:} Rxd5 $6 32. Bxd5 Qxd5 33. Qxd5 Bxd5 34. Rd6 Ba8 35. fxe4 Bxe4 ({or} 
35... fxe4 36. Rf1 $1) 36. Rb6 $1 {and Rb8. I am amazed that I did not play
this. Commentary is superfluous...}) 31... Rf6 {(2)} 32. Rxf6 {(5)} Bxf6 33. g4
$2 {Whereas the queen sortie was not so bad, here (in the opponent's
time-trouble!) I simply 'twitched'.} (33. h4) (33. d6 e3 34. f3) ({and} 33. f3
{(with the threat of fxe4)} exf3 34. Re6 $1 {, etc., would all have given an
elementary win.}) 33... f4 $1 {An instant reply! For the first time Black has
acquired real counter-chances.} 34. h4 $5 {(2) With the opponent in
time-trouble, this 'side' move is not a bad chance in the unexpectedly
sharpened situation.} (34. b3 {would also have done}) ({or else} 34. Rxe4 Rxd5
35. f3 $1 ({but the over-hasty} 35. Bxd5 $2 {would have led only to a draw:}
Qxd5 36. f3 Qd1+ 37. Kf2 Bxe4 38. Qf7+ Bg7 39. fxe4 Qd2+ {with perpetual check.
Could White really have reconciled himself to such an outcome?!})) 34... Kg7 $6
{An instinctive move with the flag about to fall!} (34... e3 {would have led
to a position which seemed completely unclear to me.} 35. -- ({. But today I
see that here there was a win by either} 35. fxe3 Rxd5 36. e4 $1 ({but not} 36.
Bxd5 $2 Qxd5 37. e4 Qd3 {with a draw})) ({, or} 35. hxg5 Bxg5 36. fxe3 $1 Rxd5
37. e4 $1 Rd8 (37... Rd2 38. Qe8 $1) 38. Qf7+) ({, as well as by the merciless
} 35. Bd3+ $1 Kg8 36. b3 $1 {, when the d5-pawn is taboo because of Bc4.})) 35.
Nc3 $2 {(7) A nightmarish reply;} ({White misses an immediate and
straightforward win, which would have been achieved by} 35. d6 $1 e3 36. f3 $1
{(this is only apparently risky)} Rf8 ({or} 36... Rc8 37. Nc7 Rxc7 38. dxc7
Qxc7 39. Qe8 Qd8 40. Qf7+ {etc.}) 37. Nc7 $1 Qxf3 38. Ne6+ {, mating.}) 35...
e3 $1 {This leads to an abrupt sharpening of the play.} ({For some reason I
had reckoned only on} 35... Qxa7 $2 36. Nxe4 Qe7 37. Kf1 Bxd5 (37... gxh4 38.
Ng3 $1) 38. Bxd5 Rxd5 39. Nxf6 Qxf6 40. Qe8 {, winning.}) 36. Bd3 {(2)} exf2+
37. Kxf2 Qxb2+ 38. Re2 $2 {A blunder - now in a mutual time scramble. Indeed,
White gives up a knight for just a couple of checks!} ({After the only correct
move} 38. Ne2 {, strangely enough, White would still have retained an enormous
advantage:} -- (38... Bxd5 $6 39. Qg6+ Kf8 40. Qxh6+ Ke7 41. Kf1 $1 Kd7 42.
Qh7+ $1 ({but not} 42. hxg5 $2 Rh8 $1 43. Qxf6 Rh1+ {with perpetual check})
42... Kd6 ({or} 42... Bg7 43. Be4 $1 {and Black has problems}) 43. Rb1 $1 {
(Akopian).}) (38... Qe5 39. Kf1 $1 gxh4 40. Qg6+ Kf8 41. Qxh6+ Bg7 42. Qxh4 Rd7
43. Rb1 $1 Rxa7 44. Qd8+ Kf7 45. g5 $1 {with an irresistible attack}) (38...
Bd4+ 39. Kf1 f3 40. Qg6+ Kf8 41. Qf5+ Kg7 42. Qxf3 Rf8 (42... Bxd5 $2 43. Qxd5
$1 {and a8Q}) 43. Bf5 {, and Black has an obviously bad position (true,
nevertheless it is still playable).}) (38... Rxd5 $2 {is worse in view of} 39.
Qg6+ Kf8 40. Rb1 $1 {etc.})) 38... Qxc3 39. Qg6+ Kf8 40. Qxh6+ Bg7 41. Qxg5 Qf6
{(25) The sealed move.} ({At first sight,} 41... Qd4+ {(driving the king back
from f2)} 42. Kf1 Qf6 {was more accurate} 43. -- ({, with a win for Black
after the 'cooperative'} 43. Qxf6+ Bxf6 44. g5 Bd4 45. Bc4 $2 ({after} 45. Re4
$1 {a draw is highly probable}) 45... f3 $1 46. Ra2 $6 (46. Re4 Rd7 $1 47. Rf4+
Kg7 48. Rxf3 Rxa7 49. h5 {is more resilient}) 46... Re8 $1 47. Ra3 f2 48. Kg2
Re1 {.}) ({. But in this case White would have acquired the excellent resource
} 43. Qh5 $1 {for example:} f3 ({or} 43... Qa1+ 44. Re1 Qxa7 45. d6 $1 Qf7 46.
Qxf7+ Kxf7 47. Bc4+ $1 Kg6 48. Re6+ Kh7 49. Bd3+ $1 Kg8 50. Bc4 $1 {, prettily
maintaining the balance}) 44. Re1 f2 45. Rb1 $1 Ke7 46. Rb8 Qa1+ 47. Kxf2 Bxd5
48. Qg5+ Bf6 49. Qe3+ Kf7 50. Qf4 {with a draw. --- In the adjourned position
the restricted material also leaves White with hopes of a draw. The game was
resumed that same day, two hours later. The sharp change of scene (instead of
a win, I urgently had to find a way to draw!) had a dispiriting effect on me,
and I squandered all my chances.})) 42. Qxf6+ {(5)} Bxf6 43. Bc4 $6 {I thought
that I needed to retain the d5-pawn.} ({Both in my brief analysis, and at the
board, I did not see the most accurate continuation} 43. g5 $1 Bd4+ 44. Kf3
Bxd5+ 45. Be4 $1 Bxe4+ 46. Kxe4 Ra8 47. Ra2 Be3 48. Ra4 c4 49. Rxc4 Rxa7 50.
Kf3 (50. h5 $5) 50... Kg7 51. Rc6 {(Spassky). In the end this would have led
to the endgame with rook and bishop against rook, which, despite my depressed
state, I would most probably have held.}) 43... Bxh4+ 44. Kf3 Rd7 45. Ra2 $2 {
(5) Another mistake, now reparable only by a miracle.} (45. Rh2 $1 Bf6 46. g5
$1 {was essential, creating the greatest difficulties for Black, for example:}
Bg7 (46... Be5 47. Re2) 47. Ra2 Be5 48. Ke4 Bc7 49. Rb2 Rd8 50. Kf3 {, and
there is no win (White simply plays Kg4 or Rb3 etc.).}) 45... Bg5 {(now White
is unable to play g4-g5 and his position is lost)} 46. Ke4 Rf7 $1 47. Ra5 Kg7
$1 {(6)} ({An important moment:} 47... f3 $2 {was incorrect because of} 48.
Rxc5 Rf4+ 49. Ke5 Rxc4 50. Rxc4 f2 51. Rc8+ Kg7 52. Rxa8 f1=Q 53. Rg8+ Kxg8 54.
a8=Q+ {with a draw.}) 48. Rxc5 {(11)} Kf6 $2 {(5)} (48... Rxa7 49. Rc8 ({or} 
49. Kf5 Be7 $1 50. Rc8 f3) 49... Bb7 50. Rb8 Ba6 51. Bxa6 Rxa6 52. Rc8 (52. Kf5
Be7 $1) 52... Bh6 {etc. would also have been decisive. Apparently Spassky
thought that in this way too he would convert his extra piece, but problems
could have arisen.}) 49. Rc8 $1 {(9)} ({The variation} 49. Ra5 Re7+ 50. Kd4 {
was worse because of} Kg7 $1 {with the ideas of ..Bf6+ and ...f4-f3;} (50...
Bh4 51. d6 $1 {is unclear.})) 49... Rxa7 $6 {(2) Another error;} ({only} 49...
Re7+ $1 50. Kd4 Rxa7 {would have retained winning chances, although after} 51.
Kc5 $1 Bb7 52. Rf8+ Kg7 53. Rf5 Kh6 54. Kb6 Ra4 55. Kxb7 Rb4+ 56. Kc6 Rxc4+ 57.
Kd7 {it is possible that White's activity is sufficient for a draw.}) 50. Rf8+
Kg7 (50... Ke7 51. Rf5 {with a draw.}) 51. Rc8 $2 ({It was essential to play} 
51. Re8 $1 {(threatening Kf5)} Kf7 52. Rb8 $1 {with a positional draw. But by
now I was in a complete stupor...}) 51... Kf6 $2 ({A comedy of errors: in his
second time-trouble Black misses} 51... Bb7 $1 {.}) 52. Rf8+ Kg7 53. Rc8 $2 (
53. Re8 $1 {.}) 53... Bb7 $1 {Now White is finally lost.} 54. Rc7+ (54. Rb8 Ba6
$1 {.}) 54... Kf6 55. Kd4 Bh4 $1 56. d6 {(6)} Bf2+ {(3)} ({Or} 56... f3 $5 {.
Time-trouble was over and the third time control began.}) 57. Kc3 Be4 $1 {(29)}
({Of course, not} 57... Ke5 $2 58. d7 Be1+ 59. Kb3 Bh4 60. g5 $1 Bxg5 61. Rc5+
Kd6 62. Rxg5 Kxd7 63. Rg7+ {with a draw.}) 58. Re7 {(18)} (58. Bb5 Rb7 $1) (58.
g5+ Kxg5 59. d7 Ra8 60. Rc8 Bb6 {was also bad for White.}) 58... Rxe7 59. g5+
Kg6 60. dxe7 Bc6 61. Kb4 Bb6 {(21)} 62. Bb3 (62. Bb5 Bxb5 63. Kxb5 Kf7 $1 {and
wins.}) 62... Bd7 ({The final trap:} 62... f3 $2 63. Bd5 {with a draw.}) 63.
Bd5 {(3)} Be8 64. Bc4 f3 65. Bd3+ Kxg5 66. Bb5 f2 {. Times: 3.45-4.05. ---
The calm and enterprising way in which Spassky fought on in a hopeless
position made a great impression on me. Despite some time-trouble errors, he
splendidly exploited the tactical chances that arose and subtly sensed the
psychological nuances of the struggle. He outplayed me, in particular,
psychologically. In such an ugly position another player would simply have
lost heart, but Spassky fought on to the bitter end under the motto: 'He is
young and hot-tempered - this may tell at some point.' And that is what
happened.} 0-1

[Event "59: Tilburg"]
[Site "?"]
[Date "1981.10.08"]
[Round "6"]
[White "Hübner, R."]
[Black "Kasparov, G."]
[Result "0-1"]
[ECO "A30"]
[Annotator "Garry Kasparov"]
[PlyCount "98"]
[EventDate "1981.??.??"]
[Source "Everyman Chess"]
[SourceDate "2012.11.28"]

{Two successive defeats were a heavy blow: such a thing had not happened to me
for a long time! The next day I had Black against Robert Hübner, a finalist in
the previous Candidates cycle. And, pulling myself together, I made every
effort to retain my composure and not lose my optimism.} 1. c4 {Hübner's usual
move.} Nf6 2. Nc3 c5 3. Nf3 ({If} 3. g3 e6 4. Bg2 {, then} d5 {is good.}) 3...
e6 4. g3 b6 5. Bg2 Bb7 6. O-O Be7 7. d4 (7. Re1 {is more cunning}) ({whereas} 
7. b3 {is guileless (Game Nos. 49, 55).}) 7... cxd4 8. Qxd4 d6 $1 {This was
one of my first experiences of employing the 'hedgehog' set-up at world level.
I liked the flexibility of Black's position; he can manoeuvre for a long time,
awaiting the moment for ...b6-b5 or ...d6-d5. At that time there were not yet
any clear prescriptions, and Hübner decided to play the opening in the waiting
manner of Uhlmann - the main expert on this set-up for White.} 9. b3 ({The
immediate} 9. e4 {is also played:} O-O ({or} 9... a6) 10. Qe3 Nbd7 11. Nd4 Re8
$5 12. b3 d5 $1 {(an idea of Gelfand).}) ({An alternative is} 9. Rd1 a6 $1 10.
b3 Nbd7 11. Bb2 (11. e4 $5 Qb8 {- Game No.7 in 'Revolution in the 70s'}) 11...
O-O 12. h3 Qc7 13. e4 Rad8 14. Rac1 Rfe8 {(Renman-Kasparov, Skara 1980)}) ({or
} 9. Bg5 a6 10. Bxf6 Bxf6 11. Qf4 O-O {(Karpov-Kasparov, Moscow 1981; Game No.
3 in 'Kasparov vs. Karpov 1975-1985'), in both cases with roughly equal
chances.}) 9... O-O 10. e4 {(4)} ({The direct} 10. Ba3 {does not achieve its
aim in view of} Na6 $1 {(Game No.5 in 'Revolution in the 70s').}) 10... Nbd7 {
(2)} 11. Qe3 a6 {(2)} 12. Nd4 {(2)} ({A more accurate interpretation of
Uhlmann's plan than} 12. Bb2 Qc7 13. Rfd1 Rac8 14. Rac1 Qb8 15. Nd4 Rfe8 16. h3
Bf8 17. f4 $6 e5 $1 18. Nf5 $1 d5 19. fxe5 Bc5 20. Nd4 {(Cserna-Portisch,
Budapest 1975)} Qxe5 $1 {etc.}) 12... Qc7 13. Bb2 ({After} 13. Ba3 Rfe8 $1 14.
h3 Bf8 15. Rfe1 Rad8 16. Rad1 Nc5 17. f3 (17. f4 e5 $1) 17... g6 $1 18. g4 Bg7
19. Bb2 Ba8 20. Re2 h6 21. Rde1 Qb8 22. Qd2 $6 e5 $1 23. Nc2 b5 $1 24. cxb5 $6
(24. Ne3 {is better}) 24... d5 $1 {the 'hedgehog' bristles with all is spines 
(Uhlmann-Bönsch, Halle 1976).}) 13... Rfe8 $1 14. h3 {(3) Useful prophylaxis;}
({although the immediate} 14. Rfe1 {is also possible, with the same idea of
Re2 and Qd2-e1.}) ({Another of Uhlmann's ideas -} 14. Kh1 Bf8 15. f4 {leads
after} g6 $1 16. Rae1 Bg7 {to double-edged play.}) 14... Bf8 $1 {(2) With the
intention of ...g7-g6 and ...Bg7.} ({This is more harmonious than} 14... Rad8
15. Rfe1 Qb8 16. Re2 h6 17. Rae1 Nh7 {(Uhlmann-Kuligowski, East Germany v.
Poland 1981).}) 15. Rfe1 {(2)} (15. f4 $6 {again runs into} e5 $1 16. Nf5 d5 $1
{. 'However, here it is not all so simple:} 17. fxe5 Bc5 18. Nd4 Qxe5 19. Nxd5
Bxd5 20. cxd5 Nxd5 21. Qf2 N5f6 22. Rad1 {, maintaining the balance.' (Shipov)}
) ({Black also has a good game after} 15. Rae1 Nc5 16. Kh2 Rad8 $1 17. Re2 g6
18. Nc2 Bg7 19. Ba1 d5 $1 20. e5 Nfd7 21. cxd5 (21. f4 dxc4) 21... Nxe5 22. f4
exd5 $1 23. fxe5 d4 $1 24. Nxd4 Rxe5 25. Qf2 Nd3 {(Uhlmann-Gheorghiu, Manila
Interzonal 1976).}) 15... Rad8 {(8) Clearly hinting at the ...d6-d5
breakthrough.} (15... Rac8 16. Re2 Qb8 {is also acceptable, for example:} 17.
Qd2 ({or} 17. Rd1 Qa8 $1 18. Qd2 Qb8 $6 (18... d5 $1 {would have equalised})
19. Ba1 Ba8 20. Qe1 $1 {(Uhlmann-Ermenkov, Berlin 1982), in both cases with
some advantage to White}) 17... Nc5 (17... Qa8 $1 {with the idea of ...d6-d5
is more accurate}) 18. Rd1 Qa8 19. Qe1 $1 {(Uhlmann-Vaisser, Berlin 1982).})
16. Re2 {(5)} ({After} 16. Rad1 g6 ({but} 16... Qb8 $1 {is more subtle:} 17.
Qc1 (17. Re2 $5) 17... Nc5 {and ...Qa8, pressing on the e4-pawn 
(Uhlmann-Akesson, Polanica Zdroj 1981)}) 17. Qc1 Qb8 {, White has the good
regrouping} 18. Qa1 $1 Bg7 19. Nc2 $1 Ba8 20. Re2 {and Ne3 (Uhlmann-Vilela,
Halle 1981).}) 16... g6 {(10)} ({Later Dizdarevic and Bönsch tried} 16... Qb8
$5 {and ...Ba8 against Uhlmann.}) 17. Rae1 {(5)} ({It was still possible to
play} 17. Rd1 {(Uhlmann-Petran, Budapest 1982)}) ({or} 17. Qd2 {, in order to
hide the queen at e1.}) 17... Qb8 {(4)} 18. Qd2 {(16)} Bg7 {(10)} (18... Nc5
19. Qd1 Qa8 {is also quite good, for example:} 20. Nc2 Bg7 21. Ba1 h5 $5 22. b4
Ncd7 23. Qxd6 h4 $1 {with lively counterplay (Uhlmann-Adorjan, Budapest 1982).
At any event, the outcome of the opening is very favourable for Black.}) 19.
Qd1 {(10)} Nc5 {(9) 'Everything is ready for the breakthrough. But without
the help of the opponent it is not easy to carry it out. Any attempt by White
to play for a win will provide this help!' (Shipov)} 20. Bc1 $6 {(3) With the
dubious idea of provoking the weakening ...h7-h6.} (20. Qb1) ({or} 20. Rd2 {
was sounder. If White 'stands still', it will be hard for Black to break
through. But who has the courage to 'stand still' for the entire game?! It
seems to me that Hübner was playing in a rather carefree manner, assuming that
he could do anything he wanted within his own territory. He was probably
counting on my depressed state and waiting for me to 'twitch' somewhere.})
20... Rc8 $1 {(8) Exploiting the fact that the knight at c3 is undefended,
Black intensifies the threat of ...b6-b5 or ...d6-d5.} 21. Bg5 {(2)} h6 {(6)}
22. Bc1 Red8 $1 {Again eying the white queen from afar and, in anticipation of
...d6-d5, moving away from the X-ray of the white rooks on the e-file.} 23. Bb2
{An inglorious return home: as a result of this loss of time the black rooks
have taken up their optimal positions at c8 and d8, whereas White's are firing
into thin air.} ({In the event of} 23. Rd2 Qa8 {Black would have
advantageously maintained the tension and the threat of ...d6-d5.}) 23... b5 $5
{(15) I think that this spectacular move and the next one came as an
unpleasant surprise to Hübner.} ({The immediate blow in the centre suggested
itself -} 23... d5 $1 24. -- ({, when} 24. e5 $6 dxc4 25. Bxb7 Qxb7 26. bxc4 (
26. exf6 $2 Bxf6 27. Ne4 Nxe4 28. Rxe4 c3 $1 {and wins}) 26... Nfd7 27. f4 Nb8
$1 {and ...Nc6 is to Black's advantage.}) ({. But I was afraid (wrongly,
apparently) of the drawing tendencies in the variation} 24. exd5 exd5 25. cxd5
Nxd5 26. Nxd5 Bxd5 {, for example:} 27. -- (27. Bxd5 Rxd5 28. b4 Qd6 $1 (28...
Ne6 29. Rxe6 $1 fxe6 30. Rxe6 {is equal}) 29. bxc5 bxc5 30. Qc1 Bxd4 31. Bxd4
Rxd4 32. Qxh6 Rd1 {and ...c5-c4 with some advantage}) (27. Rd2 Bxg2 28. Kxg2
Qb7+ 29. Qf3 (29. Kh2 Rd6 $1) 29... Qxf3+ 30. Kxf3 Rd6 $1 (30... f5 $5 {and ...Ne4}) 31. Red1 Rcd8 {, and in view of the pin on the d-file White would still
have had to fight for a draw. --- However, I decided to strike a different,
rather daring blow, but one which sharply changed the character of the play.
My opponent became unsettled and within a few moves he began to 'flounder'!})))
24. cxb5 {(2)} d5 $1 {(only now!)} 25. exd5 {(17) The complications begin.} ({
It is unfavourable for White to play} 25. bxa6 $2 Bxa6 26. Rd2 dxe4) ({or} 25.
e5 $6 Nfe4 {, when he loses his e5-pawn.}) 25... Nxd5 26. Nxd5 Bxd5 {Black's
counterplay is based on the opposition of rook and queen on the d-file: ...e6-e5 is a constant threat.} 27. b4 $1 {(2) For the moment Hübner is equal to
the occasion.} ({True,} 27. Bxd5 Rxd5 28. b4 Nd7 29. Qa1 $1 {was also suitable,
eliminating the pin on the knight:} Ne5 $1 (29... axb5 $2 30. Nxe6 $1 {and wins
}) 30. Nc6 $1 Nf3+ 31. Kf1 Bxb2 32. Qxb2 Qd6 33. Qf6 Rxc6 $1 34. bxc6 Nxe1 35.
Rxe6 $1 fxe6 36. Qxg6+ Kf8 37. Qf6+ Ke8 38. c7 $1 {with an elegant draw.})
27... Bxg2 {(3)} 28. Kxg2 e5 $1 ({But not} 28... Qa8+ 29. Kh2 e5 {in view of}
30. Rxe5 $1 Bxe5 31. Rxe5 Ne6 32. Rxe6 $1 fxe6 33. Qg4 Kh7 34. Nxe6 {with full
compensation for the two exchanges.}) 29. bxc5 {(5)} exd4 {And in this
double-edged position Hübner stopped to think...} 30. Rd2 $6 {(21) An
important moment: White goes on to the defensive!} ({In 'Informator' I
suggested} 30. Qd3 axb5 31. Rc2 {with an 'equality' evaluation, but after} Qa7
$1 ({this is stronger than} 31... Qa8+ {and ...Qxa2}) 32. c6 (32. Qxb5 $2 d3 $1
) 32... Qxa2 {Black nevertheless has the better chances.}) (30. bxa6 $6 d3 $1 {
.}) ({The correct decision was the active} 30. Re7 $1 -- ({, since the reply
which I recommended a quarter of a century ago -} 30... Rxc5 31. Qb3 Rf8 $6 ({
I should add} 31... Qa8+ 32. R1e4 $1 Rf8 33. bxa6) 32. bxa6 Rb5 {does not work
on account of} 33. Qf3 $1 Rxb2 34. a7 Qd8 35. Re8 $1 {, and the a-pawn queens 
(to see this at the board was not easy!).}) ({. And if} 30... axb5) ({, or} 
30... Qxb5 {there is the good reply} 31. Qf3 {.}) ({. Therefore Black should
include} 30... Qa8+ $1 {, although after} 31. Kg1 $1 (31. R1e4 $2 Bf6) (31. Qf3
Qxf3+ 32. Kxf3) ({or} 31. c6 axb5 32. Rb7 Rxc6 33. Ree7 Qxa2 34. Rxf7 Qd5+ 35.
Kg1 Qxf7 36. Rxf7 Kxf7 {is also dangerous for White}) 31... Rxc5 ({or} 31...
axb5 32. Qb3 Rf8 33. Ba3 (33. R1e6 {is parried by} Rce8 ({or} 33... Rxc5 34.
Rxg6 Qd5))) 32. Qb3 Rf8 33. bxa6 Qxa6 34. Rb7 {. White does not have even a
hint of any problems})) 30... Rxc5 {(10)} 31. bxa6 ({Not} 31. Bxd4 $2 Qa8+ {
and ...Rcd5.}) 31... Qa8+ 32. Qf3 {(10)} (32. Kh2 $6 Qxa6 33. Bxd4 $2 {is not
possible on account of} Rcd5 34. Be3 Rxd2 35. Bxd2 Qd3 {(d6) with a fatal pin
on the d-file.}) 32... Qxa6 {Now it is not easy for White to combat the passed
d4-pawn - under its cover Black can attack the queen, aiming to seize control
of the a8-h1 diagonal. But for the moment his threats do not look so terrible.}
33. Red1 {(6)} ({Shipov recommended} 33. Re4 {, 'in order if possible to
eliminate the powerful pawn at the cost of the exchange:} Qa8 34. Bxd4 $5 Rcd5
35. Bxg7 Rxd2 36. Bxh6 {with an almost drawn position.'}) 33... Rf5 {(8)} 34.
Qe4 Qa4 $1 35. a3 (35. Bxd4 $2 Rfd5 $1 {and wins}) 35... Re8 $6 {(14) A
time-trouble error.} (35... h5) ({or} 35... Rc5 {was stronger.}) 36. Qb7 Rd8 $1
{(14) Reverting to the correct plan.} ({If} 36... Re2 $6 {there was the reply}
37. Rxe2 Qxd1 38. Qc8+ Kh7 39. Qc2 $1 {with equality.}) 37. Rd3 $6 {(2) Not
the best move.} (37. Qe4) ({or} 37. Kg1 {was more solid.}) 37... h5 $1 {(an
unpleasant rejoinder: it is hard to find the correct defence straight away)}
38. R1d2 $6 ({Again it was better to play} 38. Kg1 Qe8 $1 {etc.}) 38... Qe8 $1
{(2) With the threat of ...Rb8. Somehow imperceptibly White has ended up in a
difficult position.} 39. Kf1 $2 {(12)} ({Not wishing to conduct a cheerless
defence the exchange down after} 39. Bxd4 Rfd5 {, Hübner commits a fatal error.
}) (39. Kh2 {was more resilient, after which I was planning} h4 $1 {.}) ({But
not} 39. Qc7 $2 Rc8 $1 {.}) 39... Rb8 {(3)} 40. Qc7 ({If} 40. Qg2 {Black would
have won by} Qc8 $1 {with the threat of ...Rxb2.}) 40... Rxb2 $1 {(2) A
decisive combinative stroke on the last move before the time control (I still
had about eight minutes left).} 41. Rxb2 Qe4 42. Qc4 {Here the game was
adjourned and then resumed that same evening, a couple of hours later.} Qh1+ {
(8) The sealed move.} 43. Ke2 Qg1 (43... Re5+ $1 44. Kd2 Re6 {(e1) was
simpler, but the move in the game is also good.}) 44. Rb8+ Kh7 45. f4 h4 $1 46.
Rb5 ({Or} 46. Rbb3 Rf6 $1 {, and soon the curtain comes down.}) 46... Rxb5 {(3)
} 47. Qxb5 hxg3 48. Qg5 Qf2+ 49. Kd1 Qf1+ ({In view of} 49... Qf1+ 50. Kc2 ({or
} 50. Kd2 g2 51. Rg3 Bh6 $1) 50... Qe2+ 51. Rd2 d3+ {. Times: 2.32-2.42. ---
After this good win I gained heart. I was on 3 out of 6 - just one point less
than the leading quintet!}) 0-1

[Event "60: Tilburg"]
[Site "?"]
[Date "1981.10.10"]
[Round "7"]
[White "Kasparov, G."]
[Black "Petrosian, T."]
[Result "0-1"]
[ECO "D22"]
[Annotator "Garry Kasparov"]
[PlyCount "83"]
[EventDate "1981.??.??"]
[Source "Everyman Chess"]
[SourceDate "2012.11.28"]

{Against one of these, ex-world champion Tigran Petrosian, I had White in the
next round - and, naturally, I wanted to gain revenge for the vexing loss in
Moscow in April. But again I ran into an amazing defence by 'Iron Tigran'.} 1.
d4 d5 2. c4 dxc4 3. Nf3 Nf6 4. e3 Bg4 {(2)} 5. Bxc4 e6 6. h3 {(4)} Bh5 7. Nc3 {
(2)} ({If} 7. Qb3 {, then} Bxf3 8. gxf3 Nbd7 {(Szabo-Larsen, Portoroz
Interzonal 1958), obtaining reasonable compensation for the pawn after} 9. Qxb7
c5 {(the same is played after 6 Qb3). Black's successes in this direction
raised the stock of the moves 3 e4 and 3 e3 (instead of 3 Nf3).}) 7... a6 {(3)}
8. g4 {(5)} Bg6 9. Ne5 {The comparatively rare variation chosen by my opponent
came as something of a surprise to me - however, a pleasant one: I though that
White's advantage in space would give me chances of an attack.} Nbd7 {(4)} 10.
Nxg6 hxg6 11. Bf1 $1 {(9)} (11. g5 {is harmless:} Nd5 12. Nxd5 exd5 13. Bxd5 c6
14. Bb3 (14. Bc4 {is more accurate}) 14... Qxg5 15. Qf3 Nf6 {(Petrosian-Ivkov,
Hamburg 1965)} ({or} 15... Bb4+ {and ...Qf5 (Petrosian-Djindjihashvili,
Olympiad, Buenos Aires 1978). When I made the 'reverse' move with my bishop
and stood up from the board, Spassky approvingly slapped me on the shoulder: a
good manoeuvre!})) 11... c6 {(5)} 12. Bg2 Qc7 13. O-O Be7 {(4)} 14. f4 {(4)}
Nb6 {(3)} 15. g5 {(9)} (15. a4 {also came into consideration.}) 15... Nfd7 (
15... Nfd5 $6 16. e4 Nxc3 17. bxc3 {is inferior.}) 16. Qg4 {(10)} O-O-O {(3) 
In search of counterplay Black must castle queenside;} ({if} 16... O-O $2 {,
then} 17. h4 $1 {.}) 17. Rb1 {(12)} Kb8 {(20)} 18. b4 {(5)} Nd5 19. Na4 $5 ({
(instead of the quiet} 19. Nxd5 {)}) 19... f5 $1 {(7) Again a surprise;} ({
when I sacrificed the pawn I was hoping for} 19... Nxb4 $2 20. Bd2 Nd5 21. e4 {
, when White's attack develops without any particular interference - even
after the best} f5 {(Petrosian)} 22. gxf6 N5xf6 23. Qxe6 Nc5 24. Nxc5 Bxc5 25.
dxc5 Rxd2 26. e5 Nd5 27. Qxg6) 20. Qg3 $5 {(8) Insisting on the pawn
sacrifice, although now it is far more risky!} ({The double-edged} 20. gxf6
gxf6 21. Qxe6 Rde8 $1 {was also unclear (Petrosian). I had to accept the
appearance of an 'eternal' knight on d5.}) 20... Nxb4 {(10)} 21. Bd2 Nd5 22.
Rfc1 {(2) The pressure on the open b- and c-files allows White to look to the
future with optimism, and for the moment, on a board full of pieces, Black's
extra pawn is hardly felt.} Ka7 {(5)} 23. Qe1 {(4)} Ba3 $5 {(14)} 24. Rc2 {(12)
} Qd6 25. Rb3 {(2)} Qe7 {(4)} 26. Qe2 {(9)} ({Serious consideration should
have been given to the immediate} 26. Nb2 $5 Bxb2 27. Rcxb2 Rb8 28. e4 fxe4 29.
Qxe4 {, maintaining the dynamic balance.}) 26... Rb8 {(5)} ({In Petrosian's
opinion,} 26... Ra8 $5 {was more accurate, with the same idea of ...Rhc8 and ...b7-b5.}) 27. Qd3 Bd6 {(2)} ({If} 27... Nb4 28. Bxb4 Bxb4 {there is an
unpleasant piece sacrifice -} 29. Bxc6 $1 bxc6 30. Rxc6 Rb5 31. a3 $1 Nb8 32.
Rc2 $1 Bd6 33. Rxb5 axb5 34. Nc3 {with a powerful attack.}) 28. Nb2 $1 {(2)}
Rhc8 29. Nc4 Bc7 $6 {(5) It would appear that my highly experienced opponent
overestimated the soundness of his position.} ({After} 29... N7b6 $1 {
(immediately clarifying the intentions of the knight on c4) nothing definitely
advantageous for White is apparent.}) 30. a4 $1 {Here I was already
anticipating placing my pawn on a5, then playing Rcb2 and Qb1 - and gaining a
convincing victory!} ({For example:} 30. a4 Rh8 $6 31. a5 $1 Ka8 32. Rcb2 $1
Qf8 33. Qb1 $1 Qc8 34. Bb4 $1 Nxb4 35. Rxb4 Ka7 36. Nb6 Bxb6 37. axb6+ Ka8 38.
Ra4 {and wins. And indeed, it is not clear what Black can do.}) 30... b5 $6 {
This move staggered me.} ({It looks like a gesture of despair - after the
natural} 30... N7b6 31. Na5 {the first impression is that White's threats
snowball:} Bd8 (31... Bd6 $2 32. Rcb2) 32. Bf1 $1 Qd7 (32... Ra8 $2 33. Nxb7 $1
Kxb7 34. a5 {is bad for Black}) ({, while after} 32... c5 33. dxc5 Rxc5 {both}
34. Rcb2 ({and} 34. Nc6+ $5 Rxc6 35. Rxc6 Ka8 36. Rc2 Nxa4 37. Rb1 {are
tempting})) 33. Rcb2 c5 34. dxc5 Rxc5 35. Nxb7 $5 (35. Qd4 $5) 35... Rxb7 36.
a5 {with an attack, although after} Rb5 37. Rxb5 (37. Qd4 Rxb3 38. Rxb3 Qc6 $1)
37... axb5 38. Qd4 ({or} 38. axb6+ Bxb6 39. Qa3+ Kb8 40. Bxb5 Qe7 {(c7) Black
retains drawing chances}) 38... b4 39. axb6+ Bxb6 40. Ra2+ Kb8 41. Qe5+ Rc7 $1
42. Bg2 Bc5 43. Ra6 Kc8 $1 {(with the idea of} 44. Rxe6 $6 Ne7 $1 {).}) 31.
axb5 {(3)} cxb5 {(3)} 32. Ra2 $1 {(3) A strong rejoinder: first and foremost
33 Rba3 is threatened, but that is not all. It appears that the collapse of
Black's defences is now imminent. I remember that I was very proud of my
position and I thought that the game was already over.} Kb7 $6 {(10) But this
move staggered me even more: can such play really go unpunished?!} ({It
appeared that the opponent was obliged to go in for the variation} 32... Bd6
33. Rxb5 Rxb5 34. Nxd6 Qxd6 35. Qxb5 Rc2 $1 36. Qb3 Rxa2 37. Qxa2 N7b6 38. Bf1
Nc7 {with chances of a defence, although the long-range bishops would have
left White with an enduring advantage. Sensing that the win was somewhere near
at hand, I began to grow nervous.}) (32... bxc4 $2 33. Rxa6+ $1) (32... Bxf4 $2
33. Na3 $1 {.}) 33. Bb4 $2 {(6) Strangely enough, this natural move, building
up the pressure, is a serious mistake. I underestimated the opponent's
defensive potential! White should not be circumventing, but attacking Black's
fortifications - at a6, b5 and d5.} ({Firstly, this aim would have been served
by the knight manoeuvre c4-a3-c2-b4. I discovered the grandiose move} 33. Na3
$1 {immediately after the game.} -- ({. Thus if} 33... Qe8 {there is the very
strong} 34. Nxb5 $1 axb5 35. Qxb5+ Bb6 36. Ra6 $1 Kc7 37. Ba5 $1 Kd8 38. Bxd5
exd5 39. Qxd5 {etc.}) ({. In my book 'The Test of Time' (1986) I gave} 33...
Bb6 34. Nc2 $1 Ra8 35. Nb4 Qd6 36. -- (36. e4 {(?)} fxe4 ({overlooking the
spectacular refutation, later pointed out by Timman:} 36... Nc5 $3 37. dxc5
Qxc5+ 38. Kh2 Qg1+ 39. Kg3 Qf2+ (39... Rh8 40. Be3 $1) 40. Kh2 Qg1+ {with
perpetual check}) 37. Qxe4 {as the main variation.}) ({. Even so, with the
computer's help I was able to find the accurate} 36. Rb1 $1 Nb8 (36... Rc4 $2
37. Qa3 $1) 37. Qb3 Rc4 ({or} 37... Rd8 38. Rc1) 38. Rc1 $1 Rxc1+ 39. Bxc1 Nc6
40. Nxd5 exd5 41. Bxd5 {and wins.})) ({. The same computer 'friend' brought
some 'joy' in another direction. In that book I stated that after 33 Na3! the
reply} 33... N7b6 {would lose to} 34. Nxb5 axb5 35. Qxb5 -- (35... Ra8 $4 36.
Qxd5+ {, and mate}) (35... Rd8 36. Bb4 $1 Qe8 (36... Qf7 37. Bc5) 37. Qa6+ Kc6
38. Bc5 Kd7 (38... Ra8 39. Rxb6+) 39. Bf1 $1 {.}) ({. However, it transpired
that} 35... Rh8 $1 {is more resilient - here White still has to display
exceptional ingenuity in attack:} 36. Bb4 $1 Qe8 37. Qa6+ Kc6 38. Bf1 $1 Nxb4
39. Rxb4 Qd8 (39... Kd6 40. Qa3 $1) ({or} 39... Qe7 40. Bb5+ Kd5 41. Qa3 $1 {
is also bad for Black}) 40. Qb5+ Kd6 41. Qe5+ Ke7 42. Qxg7+ Kd6 43. Qe5+ Ke7
44. Ra7 {and wins.}))) ({Secondly, after the publication of Volume III of 'My
Great Predecessors' (2004), where this game was published with the majority of
the variations given above, I saw that the 'interesting' move} 33. Qb1 $1 {,
which supposedly 'would not have solved the problems facing White', would in
fact also have given an irresistible attack: after} Re8 (33... Rd8 $6 34. Rxb5+
$1) ({or} 33... Rh8 {the patient move} 34. Rc2 $1 {is very strong, with the
threats of Na5+, Bb4 and Rxb5+ (and if} Ka7 {, then first} 35. Qa1 $1 {). ---
Thus, to find clear ways leading to a win for White, many years and many
megahertz of computer power were required. But at the board, not suspecting
any dangers, I continued simply building up the pressure. Such a general
approach does not always prove correct, as I came to realise within literally
a couple of moves.})) 33... Qe8 $1 {(3) From here the queen indirectly
defends the b5-pawn.} (33... Qd8 $2 {was much weaker in view of} 34. e4 $1 fxe4
(34... Nxb4 35. Rxb4 {and wins}) 35. Qxe4 {, when Black is lost:} Qe8 ({or} 
35... bxc4 36. Qxe6 N7b6 37. Rba3 $1 {also with a mating attack}) 36. Qxd5+ $1
exd5 37. Bxd5+ Ka7 38. Rxa6+ $1 Kxa6 39. Ra3+ Ba5 40. Rxa5# {.}) 34. Bd6 $6 {
(3)} (34. Ba5 Qe7 $1 {was also no use}) ({and neither was Petrosian's
recommendation} 34. Nd6+ Bxd6 35. Bxd6 Ra8 36. e4 {, in view of} fxe4 37. Bxe4
Rc6 {with double-edged play.}) ({But the cool-headed} 34. Ba3 $1 Ra8 35. Rb1 {
with the idea of Qb3 would have left White with much the better chances.})
34... Ra8 $1 {(5)} 35. Qb1 $6 {(9) White again plays on general grounds,
hoping that an opportunity for him to land some combinative blow will present
itself.} ({After the 'concrete'} 35. e4 fxe4 36. Qxe4 Qf7 {Black, with his
powerful knight on d5, could have felt quite calm.}) ({He would also have had
a comfortable game after} 35. Rb1 Bb6 $1 36. Ne5 Nxe5 37. Bxe5 Qd7 {. But with
the retreat 34 Ba3! White would still have retained reasonable compensation
for the pawn.}) 35... Kc6 $3 {A fantastic defence! This move, which Petrosian
made instantly, threw me into complete confusion: how is it possible to move
the king forward with a board full of pieces?! Who, after Steinitz, had done
such a thing?! The psychological effect of the 30...b5?! thrust and the king
march ...Ka7-b7-c6 was so strong, that I was unable to gather my thoughts,
failed to find a drawing combination, and lost quickly...} 36. Rba3 $2 {(7)} ({
It was essential to play} 36. Bxc7 $1 bxc4 (36... Kxc7 37. Nb2 Kd8 38. Nd3 {
with compensation for the pawn}) 37. Rb7 $1 ({the over-optimistic} 37. Ba5 $6
cxb3 38. Qxb3 Rab8 39. Rc2+ {is refuted by} Nc5 $1 40. Rxc5+ Kd7) 37... Rxc7
38. Rxa6+ Rxa6 39. Qb5+ Kd6 40. Qxa6+ Ke7 $1 41. Bxd5 Rxb7 42. Bxb7 ({not} 42.
Qxe6+ $2 Kd8) 42... Qb8 $1 {with a draw.}) 36... bxc4 37. Rxa6+ Rxa6 38. Rxa6+
Bb6 39. Bc5 (39. Qb4 Kb7 40. Ra2 c3 $1 {.}) 39... Qd8 40. Qa1 {(4)} ({If} 40.
Qb4 {, then} Kb7 $1 {- this move both suggests itself,} ({and is the only one
to win (} 40... Ra8 $4 41. Be7 $3 {and White wins).})) 40... Nxc5 41. dxc5 Kxc5
42. Ra4 {. And White resigned. In analysis after the game it was noticeable
how much more deeply my opponent had evaluated the positions that arose. ---
Times: 2.29-2.29. --- Following the one in Moscow (Game No.52), this was
another unforgettable lesson! The games with Petrosian broadened my
understanding of chess. Had it not been for these defeats, I would possibly
not have reached the top in chess. I saw how many latent defensive
possibilities are often concealed in cramped positions! --- After this
dramatic duel I again sank to 'minus one' and lost my last chances of success
in the tournament. The race was led by Petrosian, Timman and Beliavsky on 5
out of 7, followed by Andersson (4½) and Portisch (4). --- Now I had to try
and extricate myself from a minus score, since my store of energy and my
eagerness for a fight had not yet disappeared. And my next opponent, the
outstanding master of defence Ulf Andersson, was very unlucky: that day I
managed in one game to concentrate my entire offensive power (see the
following game).} 0-1

[Event "61: Tilburg"]
[Site "?"]
[Date "1981.10.11"]
[Round "8"]
[White "Kasparov, G."]
[Black "Andersson, U."]
[Result "1-0"]
[ECO "E12"]
[Annotator "Garry Kasparov"]
[PlyCount "59"]
[EventDate "1981.??.??"]
[Source "Everyman Chess"]
[SourceDate "2012.11.28"]

1. d4 Nf6 2. c4 e6 3. Nf3 b6 4. a3 Bb7 (4... c5 {- Game Nos. 32, 68.}) 5. Nc3
Ne4 {(6) At that time this was the Swedish grandmaster's favourite reply to
the 4 a3 variation.} ({In my opinion, the usual} 5... d5 {is more promising 
(Game Nos. 43, 52, 73, 75, 85, 98).}) 6. Nxe4 Bxe4 7. Nd2 $5 {An ambitious
continuation.} ({I had also analysed} 7. e3 {with the idea of} c5 ({but Ulf
used to defend with} 7... Be7 8. Bd3 Bxd3 9. Qxd3 d5 {, and I wanted something
more}) 8. Bd3 Bxd3 9. Qxd3 cxd4 10. exd4 d5 11. Bg5 Be7 12. Bxe7 Qxe7 13. O-O {
, when White has the better prospects.}) 7... Bg6 $6 {(17) A new move, but
hardly a good one.} ({If} 7... Bb7 {Black was probably afraid of the advance}
8. e4 {, but after} Qf6 9. d5 ({only not} 9. e5 $6 Qg6 10. Nf3 f6) 9... Bd6 10.
Bd3 Na6 11. O-O Nc5 12. Bc2 O-O 13. Rb1 a5 14. Nf3 {White's advantage is
comparatively slight.}) 8. g3 $1 {(10) An immediate change of plan: if the
black bishop has moved off the long diagonal, why not occupy it with the white
bishop?} Nc6 {(5)} ({'The same fanciful course', I wrote in 'The Test of Time',
where I recommended the 'normal'} 8... c6 9. Bg2 d5 {(strangely enough, in the
game Black only plays ...d7-d5 just before he resigns), which is the event of}
10. O-O ({but} 10. e4 $1 Be7 11. h4 $1 {is more vigorous, with an unpleasant
initiative (for example,} h6 12. h5 Bh7 13. exd5 exd5 14. cxd5 cxd5 15. Qb3 {
, etc.)}) 10... Be7 11. e4 {'would merely have given White slightly the better
chances'. --- In fact, Ulf adopted a practical approach: he thought that Black
had time for a series of unhurried positional moves, creating long-term
preconditions for counterplay. From this point of view, 8...Nc6 suggests
itself.}) 9. e3 a6 $6 {(5)} ({Black concedes space after} 9... e5 10. d5 {
(Psakhis-Gurgenidze, 52nd USSR Championship, Riga 1985)}) ({or} 9... a5 10. b3
e5 11. d5 {(Rustemov-Chernyshov, Elista 2001).}) ({Perhaps he should have
remembered about the development of his kingside -} 9... Be7 10. Bg2 O-O {,
although after} 11. b4 ({and} 11. O-O a5 12. Ne4 {and Nc3 Black's position is
unpromising. It was for this reason that Andersson began preparing an advance
on the queenside.})) 10. b4 $1 {(6)} (10. b3 {was also not bad, but I decided
to provoke my opponent into playing actively.}) 10... b5 {(13) Logical!} (
10... Bd6 11. Bg2 O-O 12. O-O {would clearly have played into White's hands.
But now it appears that Black has achieved some potential positional gains,
which he may subsequently be able to exploit.}) 11. cxb5 {(3)} ({After} 11. Bb2
$5 bxc4 12. Bxc4 {would also have faced an unpleasant defence.}) 11... axb5 12.
Bb2 ({Consistent development with an attack - now Bxb5 is threatened (} 12.
Bxb5 $2 Nxb4 {).}) 12... Na7 $6 {(6)} (12... Rb8 {was better, although here
too after} 13. Rc1 {White has an appreciable advantage. At this moment Ulf
assessed his position optimistically: after the planned ...d7-d5 Black will
have nothing to fear. But - to the end of the game he is not allowed any
respite!}) 13. h4 $1 {(3) The start of a ferocious assault. A weakening of
Black's kingside must be provoked.} h6 $2 {(5) An imperceptible but possibly
already decisive mistake: Black allows h4-h5, which later allows White to
exploit the weakness of the g6-square.} ({Better defensive chances were
offered by the seemingly risky} 13... h5 {- after} 14. d5 $1 {(the same
obstructive sacrifice as in the game)} exd5 15. Bg2 c6 16. O-O f6 17. Re1 Be7
18. e4 dxe4 19. Nxe4 ({or} 19. Bxe4 {White also has a dangerous attack, but
Black can still resist}) 19... O-O 20. g4 $5 {Crouch;} ({after Stohl's move} 
20. Nc5 {there is the acceptable reply} Bxc5 21. bxc5 Nc8)) 14. d5 $1 {(6)}
exd5 {(11)} 15. Bg2 c6 {(14)} 16. O-O {This is the position for which White
was aiming. The development of the black pieces has been retarded, and the
threat of opening up the game by e3-e4 is essentially unavoidable: although 16.
..f5 parries this threat, after 17 Nf3! the weaknesses in Black's position are
irreparable.} f6 {(6) Andersson tries to castle artificially, but in so doing
he catastrophically weakens the light squares.} 17. Re1 {(13)} ({The immediate
} 17. e4 $5 {was more forceful, with the idea of} dxe4 18. Qg4 $1 Kf7 ({if} 
18... Bf7 {(h7), then} 19. Nxe4 $1 {is strong}) 19. h5 Bh7 20. Bxe4 Bxe4 21.
Nxe4 Be7 22. Rfe1 $1 {(Crouch), reaching a position from the game.}) 17... Be7
$6 {(4) This already loses by force.} (17... Kf7 $6 {was also insufficient in
view of} 18. e4 ({or} 18. Qb3 $5 Be7 (18... f5 19. Nf3 {- Crouch}) 19. e4 Re8
20. exd5 Kf8 21. Rad1 {etc.} (21. Re3 $5)) 18... dxe4 19. h5 $1 (19. Nxe4 $5)
19... Bf5 20. Bxe4 {.}) ({After} 17... Bf7 18. e4 Be7 19. exd5 O-O {White
would also have retained strong pressure (} 20. Nb3 ({or} 20. Qg4 {), but now
he breaks through on the decisive part of the battlefield.})) 18. Qg4 Kf7 19.
h5 Bh7 20. e4 $1 dxe4 {(2)} 21. Bxe4 {(2)} Bxe4 (21... d5 $2 22. Bxh7 Rxh7 23.
Nf3 $1 {.}) 22. Nxe4 {It only remains to play Rad1, and White will fully
mobilise his forces, whereas the black pieces continue to huddle together on
the back two ranks. The outcome is decided.} Nc8 {(27) The black king is not
destined to find a secure shelter.} ({If} 22... Rf8 {there is the immediately
decisive} 23. Rad1 d5 24. Nxf6 $1) ({while if} 22... Re8 {-} 23. Qg6+ Kf8 24.
g4 {, and there is no defence against Ng3-f5.}) ({Also bad is} 22... d5 23. Nc5
$1 {Stohl;} (23. Rad1 $5 {- Crouch}) 23... Bxc5 24. Qe6+ Kf8 25. bxc5 {with a
mating attack.}) 23. Rad1 Ra7 {(7)} (23... Nb6 {would have created an opening
for the murderous} 24. Nd6+ $1 ({or} 24. Rd6 $1 {Black has somehow defended
his weaknesses, but with a simple combination White destroys the defensive
fortifications.})) 24. Nxf6 $3 {(6)} gxf6 {(4)} (24... Bxf6 {would have lost
immediately to} 25. Qg6+ Kf8 26. Bxf6 gxf6 27. Re6 $1 {.}) 25. Qg6+ Kf8 26. Bc1
$5 ({Playing for mate, since} 26. Rxe7 Qxe7 27. Bxf6 Qh7 28. Bxh8 Qxg6 (28...
Qxh8 29. Re1 $1 Ne7 30. Qd6 {and wins}) 29. hxg6 Ne7 30. Bd4 {and Bc5 (Stohl)
would have 'merely' led to a won endgame.}) 26... d5 {(7) Alas, with a great
delay.} ({However, there is no choice:} 26... Qe8 27. Bxh6+ Rxh6 28. Qxh6+ Kg8
({or} 28... Kf7 29. Qh7+ Kf8 30. h6 Qf7 31. Qf5 $1 Nd6 32. Qf4 {(and if} Ne8 {
, then} 33. Qe3 $1 {, as specified by Stohl, while Crouch adds} Rb7 34. Qxe7+
Qxe7 35. Rxe7 Kxe7 36. h7 {)}) 29. Re4 f5 30. Rdd4 $1 {(a pretty rook
sacrifice!)} fxe4 31. Rxe4 {, mating the bare king.}) 27. Rd4 $1 {(3) The
clearest way to win;} ({along with} 27. Re4 $1 {.}) ({Black would still have
had some chances after} 27. Bxh6+ Rxh6 28. Qxh6+ Kg8 $1 {-} 29. Rd4 $6 ({but
here too he would not have held out after} 29. Qg6+ $1 Kh8 (29... Kf8 $2 30. h6
) 30. Rc1 $1 Rc7 31. Re6) 29... Bf8 $1 30. Rg4+ Rg7 {.}) 27... Nd6 (27... f5
28. Bxh6+ {.}) 28. Rg4 (28. Bxh6+ $1 {.}) 28... Nf7 29. Bxh6+ $1 Ke8 ({Or} 
29... Nxh6 30. Qg7+ Ke8 31. Qxh8+ Kd7 32. Qxh6 {.}) 30. Bg7 ({And with his
flag about to fall, Black resigned:} 30. Bg7 Rg8 31. h6 $1 {. Times: 1.05-2.
28.}) (30. -- {This game, which was judged to be the best in 'Informator'
Volume 32, is dear to me for its harmony. Although outwardly strange, in
essence it is absolutely harmonious. White made seemingly ugly, chaotic moves
- in particular with his pawns, but when, finally, his plan also became clear
to the opponent, it transpired that all the white pieces joined in the play as
if by schedule. The game breathes dynamism and is typical of my style at that
time - unrestrained pressure on a solid positional basis; I played very
quickly and made, as it later transpires, almost the ideal moves. For
Andersson this crushing defeat remained a terrible reminder, and later he was
no longer able to play normally against me. --- In connection with this game,
Petrosian commented: 'Kasparov's emergence on the international scene has made
much the same impact as Karpov's emergence once did. Play based on general
considerations does not usually work successfully against either of them...
The ability to mobilise his reserve forces patiently before advancing them is
one of the secrets of Kasparov's success... One can only admire the way that
all his pieces, apart from his king, take part in the attack, and at the same
time the opponent has absolutely no opportunity to exchange even one of them.'}
) 1-0

[Event "62: Tilburg"]
[Site "?"]
[Date "1981.10.13"]
[Round "10"]
[White "Kasparov, G."]
[Black "Larsen, B."]
[Result "1/2-1/2"]
[ECO "A54"]
[Annotator "Garry Kasparov"]
[PlyCount "96"]
[EventDate "1981.??.??"]
[Source "Everyman Chess"]
[SourceDate "2012.11.28"]

{In the 9th round after a complicated battle I drew with Black against
Ljubojevic. And in the 10th round I faced at the board for the first time the
legendary Bent Larsen. I had only 4½ points out of 9, and I was burning with
a desire to distinguish myself at least in some way, to move on to a plus
score, and so I continued acting with determination.} 1. d4 Nf6 2. c4 d6 3. Nc3
e5 4. Nf3 {(8)} Nbd7 5. Bg5 {(2)} ({In Bugojno 1982 against Larsen I chose the
main plan with} 5. e4 {and Be2. But here, on encountering this rare set-up for
only the second time in my life, I played as I had against Morovic 
(Cagnes-sur-Mer 1977).}) 5... Be7 6. e3 O-O 7. Qc2 (7. Be2 c6 8. O-O Ne8 $1 {
with equality.}) 7... c6 8. Bd3 h6 {(4)} 9. h4 $5 {(5)} ({Against Morovic I
played more simply -} 9. Bh4 {, after which, incidentally,} Nh5 $1 10. Bxe7
Qxe7 11. O-O Nhf6 {is good, when White has merely an insignificant advantage.
But in this game my fingers were so itchy, that I was ready to sacrifice
anything. And Larsen accepted the challenge!}) 9... b5 $6 {(7) This showy,
reckless move, immediately creating strong tension, was deemed dubious and did
not occur again in any serious games.} (9... Re8 {is more solid, after which
White has tried} 10. Bxf6 ({as well as} 10. dxe5) ({and even the risky} 10.
O-O-O {(regardless of} e4 $5 11. Nxe4 Nxe4 12. Bxe4 hxg5 {)}) 10... Bxf6 11.
O-O-O {(Alburt-Morovic, Santiago 1981).}) ({Black can also consider} 9... exd4
10. exd4 d5 {(Cebalo-Fries Nielsen, Plovdiv 1983),} ({or} 10... Re8 11. O-O-O
Nf8 {- in my youth I thought that White was better here, but now I am not so
sure: the black bishop comes out to the weakened g4-square, etc.})) 10. dxe5 {
(19)} ({Of course, no one has refuted the crude} 10. cxb5 $5 cxb5 11. Bxb5 {,
when after the possible} Bb7 12. Rd1 {it is doubtful whether Black has full
compensation for the pawn. But in those times it was considered bad form to
capture such pawns. We were both struggling desperately for the initiative,
and in such a struggle pawns did not count.}) 10... Nxe5 {(3)} 11. Nxe5 dxe5
12. O-O-O {(5)} Qa5 13. Kb1 {(3) Useful prophylaxis.} ({In analysis after the
game, here Spassky demanded a move 'in the style of Kazimirych' (i.e. Tolush) -
} 13. g4 $5 {.} -- ({. However, in the event of} 13... b4 14. Bxf6 Bxf6 15. g5
Be7 $1 16. Na4 (16. Ne4 $5) ({but not} 16. gxh6 $2 bxc3 17. Rdg1 g6 $1 18. Bxg6
Kh8 {and wins}) 16... h5 $1 17. Bh7+ Kh8 18. Be4 Qc7 {White's slight
initiative evaporates.}) ({. Besides, Black can boldly reply} 13... Bxg4 $5 14.
Rdg1 h5 {. This conclusion was reached in the joint analysis with Larsen and
Spassky, but later I thought that after} 15. Ne4 {White had an obvious
advantage. Now I see that this is an exaggeration, for example:} Kh8 16. Bxf6
gxf6 17. Kb1 Rad8 {with an unclear game. The development of White's initiative
is hindered by the nail that has been driven into his position - the bishop on
g4.})) 13... Be6 {(7) The most natural reply, and the one that I was counting
on;} ({although} 13... Rb8 $5 {was also possible.}) 14. Bxf6 $1 {(2)} Bxf6 15.
Ne4 Be7 (15... Rfd8 $5 {(not allowing the following tactical stroke)} 16. Nxf6+
gxf6 {was more steady, with counterplay to neutralise the spoiling of the
kingside pawns.}) 16. Ng5 $1 {(a surprise!)} bxc4 $1 {(6)} ({Of course, not} 
16... hxg5 $2 {in view of} 17. Bh7+ $1 Kh8 18. hxg5 g6 19. Bxg6+ Kg8 20. Bxf7+
$1 Kxf7 21. Qh7+ Ke8 22. Qg6+ {.}) ({Also} 16... Bxg5 $6 17. hxg5 Bxc4 $2 18.
Bxc4 bxc4 19. gxh6 g6 20. Qxc4 {is bad for Black.}) 17. Bh7+ $1 {(10)} Kh8 18.
Bf5 {(5) It is on this nuance that White's entire idea is based.} Bxf5 $6 {(7)
} (18... e4 {was not so clear:} 19. Bxe6 fxe6 20. Nxe4 Rab8 21. Qxc4 Qe5 22.
Qd4 Qf5 23. Qd3 Bf6 24. b3 a5 {with counterplay for the pawn.}) ({An
unexpected piece sacrifice was also of interest -} 18... Bd5 $5 19. e4 Rab8 $1
20. exd5 cxd5 $1 {, and Black is alright;} (20... Ba3 $2 21. b3 cxb3 22. axb3
cxd5 ({or} 22... g6 23. dxc6 gxf5 24. c7 {and wins}) 23. Be6 $1) 21. Bd7 (21.
Be6 $5 Bxg5 22. Rxd5 Qb6 23. hxg5 Qxe6 {with equality}) 21... e4 $1 22. Bc6 Bf6
23. Rxd5 Qa6 $1 {.}) 19. Qxf5 Bxg5 {Concrete play begins.} ({In the variation} 
19... g6 20. Nxf7+ Kg7 21. Qxe5+ Qxe5 22. Nxe5 Rxf2 23. Rd7 Re8 24. Nxc4 $1 (
24. Rxa7 c3 $1) 24... Rxg2 25. Rxa7 {and a2-a4 White is a pawn up in the
endgame, but he still has to work hard to achieve a win.}) 20. hxg5 Rab8 21.
Rc1 $1 {(3) The only move that retains an advantage.} (21. gxh6 $2 {was
incorrect on account of} Rxb2+ $1 22. Kxb2 Rb8+ 23. Kc1 Qc3+ $1 24. Qc2 Qa3+
25. Kd2 Rb2 {.}) 21... Qd2 {(11)} ({If} 21... Qb5 $6 22. Rc2 e4 {, then} 23.
Qf4 $1 {and gxh6 is very strong.}) 22. Rc2 {(5)} Qd3 23. g4 $1 {(3) This was
underestimated by Larsen. I remember that I was very proud of this positional
move, whereas the computer suggests it in the very first second! After giving
up a pawn, White continues the fierce struggle for the initiative.} Qxf5 {(8)}
24. gxf5 Rb4 25. Rh4 {(10)} (25. gxh6 $5) ({or} 25. f6 $5 {also came into
consideration.}) 25... Rd8 {(5)} ({In the event of} 25... Kh7 {Black also has
a rather unpleasant position:} 26. f6 Rh8 27. a3 Ra4 28. Rh5 $1 {, provoking}
e4 29. Rh4 {etc.}) 26. a3 $1 Ra4 {(2)} 27. gxh6 {(5)} g6 $6 (27... Rd6 $1 {was
more resilient.}) ({And} 27... g5 {would have forced the continuation in the
game, without allowing White an additional chance.}) 28. fxg6 {(6) This
capture was criticised, but wrongly so;} ({since the 'immediately winning'} 28.
Rhxc4 $5 Rxc4 29. Rxc4 {is in fact no better: after} gxf5 ({but in the event of
} 29... Rd6 30. Rc5 g5 31. Rxe5 Rxh6 32. f6 Rxf6 33. Rxg5 Rxf2 34. Ra5 Re2 35.
Rxa7 Kg7 {the outcome is not so obvious}) 30. Rxc6 Rd1+ 31. Ka2 Rf1 {(d2)} 32.
Ra6 Rxf2 33. a4 f4 34. exf4 Rxf4 35. Rxa7 {things are indeed difficult for
Black.}) 28... fxg6 29. Rhxc4 Rxc4 30. Rxc4 Rd6 $1 31. Rc5 {(7)} Re6 {(3)} 32.
Ra5 {(3)} Re7 33. Ra6 Rc7 34. Kc2 Kh7 (34... Rf7 $5 {came into consideration,
with the idea after} 35. Kd3 Rxf2 36. b4 Kh7 ({if} 36... Rf7 {, then} 37. Ke4
Re7 38. Rxc6 Kh7 39. b5 Kxh6 40. a4 {and wins}) 37. Rxa7+ Kxh6 38. Ke4 {(?)} ({
here} 38. Ra6 $1 {would have remained the only chance of success}) 38... g5 {
of obtaining a position from the game, but avoiding the improvement for White 
(cf. the note to White's 36th move).}) 35. Kd3 {To me the endgame appeared to
be an easy win, but here Larsen, as in his former years, began performing
miracles of resourcefulness.} Rf7 $1 {A brilliant move! Black exploits his
last chance - the latent dynamics of the position.} ({He would have lost
quickly after} 35... Kxh6 $2 36. Ke4 Rf7 37. f3 $1 {.}) 36. Ke4 $2 {(7) This
would appear to throw away the win.} (36. Ke2 {was correct, for example:} c5 ({
or} 36... Rc7 37. Kf3 Rf7+ 38. Kg3 Rc7 39. b4 $1 Kxh6 40. Ra5 Re7 41. e4 Kg5
42. f3 {, and Black has a difficult position: zugzwang, weaknesses and the
active white rook. It was only after the tournament that I found this winning
set-up with my trainers Nikitin and Vladimirov, when I annotated the game for
'Informator'}) 37. Rc6 Rb7 38. Rxc5 Rxb2+ 39. Kf3 e4+ 40. Kg3 Kxh6 41. Rc7 Ra2
42. Rxa7 {with the advance of the a-pawn.}) 36... Rxf2 37. Rxa7+ Kxh6 38. b4 g5
{(2)} 39. Ra6 Kh5 {(2)} 40. Rxc6 Ra2 41. Rc1 $1 {(4) At the board I thought
that all the indicators pointed to a win, but...} g4 $1 {Creating unexpected
counterplay with just a single pawn, supported by the king.} ({If} 41... Rxa3
$2 {, then} 42. Rb1 Ra6 43. b5 Rb6 44. Kxe5 {and wins.}) 42. Kxe5 {(8)} ({If} 
42. Rb1 {Black has time to play} g3 43. b5 g2 44. b6 Rb2 $1 {with a draw.})
42... Rxa3 43. Kf4 {(12)} Rb3 {(3)} 44. Rc5+ ({It transpires that White does
not have a win:} 44. Rc4 Rb1 $1 {.}) 44... Kh4 45. Rc8 {(3) The last chance -
a pawn sacrifice.} Rxb4+ 46. e4 Kh3 $1 (46... Kh5 $2 47. Rg8 $1 {, and mate -
in 30 moves!}) 47. Rh8+ {(3)} Kg2 48. Rg8 Kh3 $1 ({If} 48... Kh3 49. Rxg4 Rxe4+
$1 {. Times: 2.35-1.30. --- In this complicated game Larsen's inexhaustible
optimism is again clearly seen. I was very upset that I was unable to win this
superior rook endgame. But Spassky said to me, then an 18-year-old youth: 'Why
are you upset? You should be paying Benya for the lesson!' (Benya was
Spassky's affectionate name for his old friend and rival.)}) (48... -- {In the
11th and final round I pressed with Black on Miles's position, but I was
unable to win. This round was decisive for the allocation of the prize places.
The leading trio, who were on 'plus three', went different ways. Petrosian
made a quick draw and remained the only contestant not to experience the
bitterness of defeat. But the fate of first place was decided in the
Beliavsky-Timman encounter. After employing an improvement in a very sharp
variation of the Sicilian Defence, Beliavsky won the game and became the
tournament victor. Thus ended one of the most memorable events of the year.
--- I may have scored only 50%, but on the other hand I 'played very
interesting chess', as was said by the players who after Tilburg arrived at
the match in Merano. Many grandmasters were now able to assess both my playing
style, and my potential. Public opinion was gradually beginning to incline
towards the fact that in 1984 there would be a Karpov-Kasparov match. ---
Meanwhile in Tilburg I established a personal tournament record in adult chess,
which, fortunately, I have not in fact beaten: I lost three games! The defeats
against Spassky and Petrosian were especially painful. I lacked that
experience in which juniors are usually found wanting when playing world-class
opponents: a completely different, as yet unaccustomed level of resistance! In
an interview given soon afterwards, I expressed dissatisfaction with my play
and said: 'It was partly fatigue that told: after all, I arrived in Tilburg
having only just returned from the world junior team championship in Graz. But
the main thing the tournament showed is that I need to work on my technique. I
still lack professional forcefulness, the ability to 'finish off' opponents.
It was for this reason that I was unable to take better or winning positions
to their logical end.'}) (48... -- {There were also unmentioned reasons for my
uneven play in the tournament. Sosonko and Spassky, with whom I struck up good
relations, held seditious 'anti-Soviet' conversations with me, and also for a
few days Sosonko loaned me a copy of Solzhenitsyn's famous Gulag Archipelago 
(which was strictly banned in the USSR), and I read it at night without a
break! And on free days I travelled to a safari park, played football, and
raced up and down the avenues on a stylish Peugeot bicycle, which the
organisers later presented to me. I remember that the customs officers at
Sheremetevo looked at me as if I were mad: everyone was bringing in electronic
gadgets from abroad, and here was some kid with a bicycle... --- Nikitin, who
had followed the tournament from Moscow, recorded in his notebook the
following lessons from Tilburg: 'Garry aimed for a fight in all 11 games. He
did not fear anyone, and not once was he outplayed. Only he did the outplaying
- either of his opponents, or himself. A dangerous one-sidedness in his play
appeared - only against the king, or more accurately - a striving for greater
complexity. In such complexity a player himself can become entangled. Play on
positional lines disappeared. He lacked strength to recover before games -
hence poor play in the fifth hour. Extraneous interests prevented him from
focusing on the games. He lost after the free days (5th and 9th October).
Conclusion: the tournament was lost on the free days! Particular attention
should be paid to ways of relaxing that do not interfere with the play. The
contact with Spassky and Sosonko and the reading of literature gave Garry much
information, which excited his mind. This seriously diverted him from the
business of the tournament and prevented him from focusing on the game in the
necessary way. He arrived in Tilburg aiming to win, but the lack of focus on
the play sharply reduced his chances.'}) (48... -- {Whereas earlier I was
greatly helped by the surprise factor - no one could believe that the
youngster sitting opposite them could present a serious danger, and also my
games were still little-known to foreign players - now the situation had
changed: my name went before me, and opponents began preparing for their games
with me. --- Later I realised how useful and, above all, how timely this
'failure' was, but at the time I experienced something of a shock. After all,
I was not accustomed to losing! Such a result disillusioned me, and I
perceived it as the collapse of my hopes. As usual, I had been aiming to win
at all costs, but the devilish ingenuity of the leading grandmasters punished
me for my excessively risky actions. This was a sobering experience, showing
that there was still much for me to learn and master in chess. I realised that
I needed greater practical experience at the level of foreign grandmaster
tournaments. I needed to learn to play more forcefully, in order to carry
through my plans to their conclusion in battles with the best tournament
players. My trainers and I agreed that this was the main lesson learned in
Tilburg... --- This was the last tournament to which my grandfather wished me
good luck. Before leaving I visited him in hospital. He had just had a serious
operation, but he was already feeling better. Our parting, as usual, was warm
but undemonstrative - my grandad didn't like superfluous words. I left in the
hope of seeing him at home in a month's time... The crisis developed suddenly.
When I was playing my first game, he was no longer alive. I wasn't told of
this: my mother said on the telephone that my grandad was still in hospital 
('some complications'). Why was I so uneasy? It was more than ten years since
my father had died, and I somehow didn't think that I would again have to
experience the bitterness and pain of losing someone close.}) (48... -- {It
had become a tradition that after returning from a tournament my mother and I
would go to the Jewish cemetery where my father was buried. On that October
day in 1981 I was taken to the Armenian cemetery. I was convulsed by sobs, but
my mother did not try to comfort me: she realised that her son was now saying
goodbye both to his grandfather, and to his childhood... For a long time I was
unable to get used to the fact that there was only one man in the house. --- I
played a further three times in Tilburg: in 1989 and 1991 I gained two
unforgettable victories, and in 1997 I shared 1st-3rd places. Although the
first attempt was a failure, I was consoled by the creative richness of the
games (in this sense Tilburg 1981 was one of my best tournaments). Moreover, I
sensed that I was on the threshold of another surge.}) 1/2-1/2

[Event "?"]
[Site "?"]
[Date "????.??.??"]
[Round "?"]
[White "USSR Champion"]
[Black "?"]
[Result "*"]
[Annotator "Garry Kasparov"]
[PlyCount "1"]
[EventDate "1984.??.??"]
[SourceDate "2009.12.07"]

{49th USSR Championship Premier League (Frunze, 26th November - 22nd December
1981): 1-2. Psakhis and Kasparov - 12½ out of 17; 3. Romanishin - 10; 4-5.
Gavrikov and Tukmakov - 9½; 6-7. Agzamov and Beliavsky - 9; 8-9. Yusupov
and Dorfman - 8½; 10-13. Kupreichik, Sveshnikov, Dolmatov and Tseshkovsky -
8; 14. Yudasin - 7½; 15-16. Kuzmin and Gulko - 6½; 17. Timoshchenko - 6;
18. Mikhalchishin - 5½.} 1. -- {The chess world was still under the
impression of Karpov's convincing victory in Merano, but the qualifying events
for the new world championship match had already begun. For Soviet players the
qualification began at the end of 1981 with the Premier League of the 49th
USSR Championship - there was also a fight for places in the Zonal tournament
which would follow two months later. However, not all were involved in this,
only 13 of the 18 contestants: thanks to our high ratings, Beliavsky and I
were admitted straight into the Interzonal events (July-September 1982), while
Kuzmin, Romanishin and Tseshkovsky, who played in the Interzonals of the
previous cycle, had reservations to the Zonal tournament. --- It was probably
both the qualifying status, and the line-up - the youngest in the entire
preceding history of Soviet chess! - that made this championship exceptionally
tense and uncompromising. Although the 'main people' - Karpov, Tal, Petrosian,
Polugayevsky and Geller - were not playing, the fans were not disappointed.
The number of decisive games exceeded 50%, and the intensity of the fight was
maintained right to the end of the last round. In the words of one of the
hundreds of spectators, the prominent writer Chingiz Aitmatov, 'all the
contestants battled as though it was the most important tournament of their
life.'} (1. -- {For almost a month there was a gripping pursuit race, in which
my rival for the lead was my fellow student team member, the most 'Eastern'
Soviet grandmaster - the 23-year-old Lev Psakhis from Krasnoyarsk. He arrived
in Frunze as 1980 USSR champion, and few imagined that he would be able to do
the 'golden double', as Botvinnik, Bronstein, Keres, Tal, Stein and
Polugayevsky had managed in their time. Such an achievement is a sure
indication of very high class, which for some reason the majority of the
players before the start of the tournament (and during it?) thought that
Psakhis was lacking. But Lev had done an enormous amount of preparatory work 
(in particular, he had included 1 d4 in his opening repertoire) and, with a
display of even, confident play, he managed to go the whole distance without
any stumbles. His brilliant results testified to the emergence in the Soviet
chess cohort of yet another outstanding grandmaster. --- For me the tournament
took a more dramatic course, although the fact that I did not need to pass
through the severe Soviet qualifying process for the world championship was a
great psychological help (it will be remembered how Spassky and Stein, and
they were not the only ones, suffered in USSR Zonal Championships). At the
start I played with composure and scored a spectacular win over the
championship debutant Viktor Gavrikov from Lithuania, a future grandmaster and
USSR co-champion in 1985 (see the following game).}) *

[Event "63: 49th USSR Championship, Frunze"]
[Site "?"]
[Date "1981.11.27"]
[Round "1"]
[White "Kasparov, G."]
[Black "Gavrikov, V."]
[Result "1-0"]
[ECO "D34"]
[Annotator "Garry Kasparov"]
[PlyCount "65"]
[EventDate "1981.??.??"]
[Source "Everyman Chess"]
[SourceDate "2012.11.28"]

1. d4 d5 2. c4 e6 3. Nf3 c5 4. cxd5 {(3)} exd5 5. g3 Nc6 6. Bg2 Nf6 7. O-O Be7
{Gavrikov had not played the Tarrasch Defence before, and I stopped to think
what he might have in mind.} ({I had already scored two wins, over Hort 
(Dortmund 1980) and Palatnik (Moscow 1981), in the main line -} 7... Be7 8. Nc3
O-O 9. Bg5 {(Game No.79). But I decided to deviate, choosing a rather
dangerous set-up which had been successfully employed by Timman.}) 8. dxc5 {(4)
} Bxc5 9. Bg5 O-O 10. Nc3 d4 ({I should remind you that} 10... Be6 11. Bxf6 $1
(11. Na4 {- Game No.45 in Volume II of 'My Great Predecessors'}) 11... Qxf6 12.
Nxd5 Qxb2 13. Nc7 Rad8 14. Qc1 Qxc1 15. Raxc1 {and Nxe6 leads to a small but
enduring advantage for White (Rubinstein-Schlechter, Vienna 1908;
Petrosian-Spassky, 16th match game, Moscow 1969).}) 11. Bxf6 ({Nothing is
promised by} 11. Ne4 Be7 12. Bxf6 Bxf6 13. Rc1 Re8 14. Ne1 {(Lasker-Tarrasch,
Berlin 1918)} Be7 $5 15. Nd3 Bf8 {with equality (Nikolic-Kasparov, Niksic 1983)
.}) 11... Qxf6 12. Nd5 Qd8 13. Nd2 a6 {A prophylactic move, preserving the
dark-square bishop from exchange for a knight.} ({Later my trainers and I came
to the conclusion that} 13... Re8 14. Rc1 Bb6 {was better, although against
Miles (Niksic 1983) I barely escaped with a draw as Black,} ({or} 14... Bf8 $5
{(the source game: Timman-Gligoric, Bugojno 1978).})) 14. Rc1 {(6)} Ba7 {(3)}
15. Nc4 {(5) The knight is eyeing the d6-square.} ({There was no longer any
point in playing} 15. Nb3 {, since the d4-pawn is securely defended}) ({but} 
15. Nf4 {was interesting, with the idea of} Bd7 16. Ne4 {(Hübner-Budde,
Bundesliga 1983).}) 15... Rb8 {(16)} ({My old 'Informator' recommendation} 
15... Bh3 16. Bxh3 Qxd5 {has not in fact found any followers - Black is
unwilling to leave the formidable white bishop without an opponent.}) 16. Nf4 {
(8) By opening the way for the bishop on g2, White hopes to retain slight
pressure.} b5 $6 {(11) Gavrikov moves his b7-pawn away from a possible attack
and forces the exchange of a pair of minor pieces, but he weakens the c-file,
on which White acquires additional invasion squares.} (16... Re8 {was sounder 
(Gagunashvili-El Gindy, Dubai 2003)}) ({or} 16... Bf5 {, with a slightly
inferior, but quite acceptable game.}) 17. Nd6 $1 {(17)} Qxd6 {(4)} ({Having
played ...b7-b5, here Black should have preferred} 17... Ne5 $1 18. Nxc8 Rxc8
19. Rxc8 Qxc8 {- although after} 20. Qb1 {(d2) and Rc1 the weakness of the a6-
and d4-pawns would have left White with some advantage, Black would have faced
less difficult problems.}) 18. Rxc6 Qd8 {(10)} ({If} 18... Qe5 {I was planning}
19. Nd3 ({but} 19. Qc2 {was also good}) 19... Qf5 20. Rd6 {.}) 19. Qc2 {(5)} a5
$6 {(6) Allowing the complete seizure of the c-file.} ({Black would still
have had difficulties after} 19... Bb7 20. Rc7 Bxg2 ({or} 20... Rc8 21. Rc1 Bb8
22. Rxc8 Bxc8 23. Nd5 {etc.}) 21. Kxg2 Bb6 22. Rc6 {.}) ({But perhaps it would
have been better to play} 19... Rb6 {(exchanging the active white rook)} 20.
Rxb6 Bxb6 21. Rc1 Bg4) ({or} 19... Bb6 {(with the idea of ...Bb7)} 20. Nd5 Be6
$1 {.}) 20. Rc1 {(7)} Re8 $2 {(22) Overlooking a veiled threat.} (20... Bd7 $6
21. Rd6 Qe8 ({or} 21... Rc8 22. Bc6 $1 {was unattractive}) 22. Nd5 {.}) ({
However, the lesser evil was} 20... Bb6 {, covering the c7-point.}) 21. Bd5 $6
{(13)} ({Alas, I also missed the pretty} 21. Rc7 $1 Bb6 22. Rxf7 $3 Kxf7 (22...
Re5 23. Nd3 $1) 23. Bd5+ Be6 24. Qf5+ Qf6 25. Qh5+ Kf8 26. Rc6 $1 d3 $1 27. e3
$1 Qf7 (27... Qh6 28. Qf3 $1) 28. Nxe6+ Rxe6 29. Qxf7+ Kxf7 30. Kf1 {, turning
to the conversion of the material advantage.}) 21... Bb6 {(7)} (21... Bb7 $2 {
was bad in view of} 22. Bxf7+ $1 Kxf7 23. Rc7+ Kg8 24. Qb3+ Kh8 25. Qf7) ({or} 
21... Bd7 $6 22. Rc7 $1 Rc8 (22... Bb6 $2 23. Bxf7+ $1) 23. Rxc8 Qxc8 (23...
Bxc8 24. Qc7) 24. Bxf7+ $1 Kxf7 25. Qb3+ Be6 26. Rxc8 Bxb3 27. Rxe8 Kxe8 28.
axb3 {with a won endgame.}) 22. Qb3 {(21)} (22. Bxf7+ $5 Kxf7 23. Qxh7 {looked
tempting, but after} d3 $1 {the position is unclear:} 24. Nxd3 ({or} 24. e3 d2
25. Rd1 Rxe3 $1 26. fxe3 Bxe3+ 27. Kf1 Bxf4 28. gxf4 Qd5 $1) (24. Qg6+ Kg8 25.
Rd6 $1 {is stronger, but here too by} Qe7 26. Rxb6 Rxb6 27. Qxb6 dxe2 28. Re1
Qb4 $1 29. Rxe2 Rxe2 30. Nxe2 Qxb2 {Black emerges unscathed}) 24... Qg5 $1 {.})
22... Re7 {(8)} 23. Bf3 {(3)} Re5 $2 {(12) This obvious move proves to be the
decisive mistake.} (23... Bb7 $6 24. Nd5 $1 Bxc6 25. Nxe7+ Qxe7 26. Rxc6 {was
also to White's advantage}) ({but} 23... Bf5) ({or even} 23... Re8 $5 {would
still have retained possibilities of a defence.}) 24. Bh5 $1 {(24)} g6 {(5)}
25. Bxg6 $1 {(7)} (25. Nxg6 $5 {will also do} -- ({, since} 25... Be6 26. Rxe6
$1 Rxe6 27. Nf4 Rf6 28. Qxb5) ({, or} 25... hxg6 26. Rxg6+ Kf8 27. Rxb6 Be6 28.
Rxe6 fxe6 29. Bg4 {is insufficient for Black}) ({, while} 25... a4 {(?), which
I recommended in 'Informator', loses to} 26. Qf3 $1 hxg6 27. Bxg6 {. White's
control of the c-file enables him to attack where he pleases, and not only on
the queenside. Gavrikov underestimated this nuance, and the sudden switching
of my pieces to the kingside caught him unawares.} (27. --))) 25... hxg6 26.
Rxg6+ Kf8 27. Rh6 (27. Rcc6 $5 {.}) 27... Ke7 $6 {(5) A natural human
reaction to the threat of Rh8+.} (27... Kg7 $2 28. Rh7+ $1) ({yet} 27... Rg5 {
was more resilient:} 28. Rcc6 $1 d3 $1 ({but not} 28... Bc7 29. Rcf6 $1) ({or} 
28... Rb7 29. Rh8+ Rg8 30. Rch6 $1) 29. Nxd3 ({or} 29. Rhf6 Rg7 30. Nxd3 {
Black cannot save the game}) 29... Kg8 30. e3 {.}) 28. Rcc6 $1 {Unexpectedly
the c6-square has become a transit point for both white rooks, which have
thereby invaded the black position. Hanging over Black are the threats of Rh7
and Ng6+!.} Rf5 {(7)} ({Also after} 28... Bf5 {there is the strong reply} 29.
Qf3 {,} ({but the simplest is} 29. Rcf6 {, when Black has no way of holding
the f7-point (the queen is tied to the defence of the bishop on b6).})) 29. Qf3
$1 {(5) The most accurate - switching the queen to the centre;} ({although} 
29. Qa3+ {would also have been decisive}) ({or even} 29. Ng6+ fxg6 30. Rh7+ Kf8
31. Rh8+ Kg7 32. Rxd8 Bxd8 {(in 'Informator' I rejected this variation as
'unclear')} 33. Rxg6+ $1 Kxg6 34. Qg8+ Kh6 35. Qxd8 {with the threat of Qd6+,
and the loss of material for Black is unavoidable.}) 29... Bc7 (29... Re5 30.
Ng6+ $1 {.}) 30. Qe4+ Re5 ({Or} 30... Be5 31. Nd3 $1 {.}) 31. Ng6+ $1 {Both
spectacular, and effective.} fxg6 32. Rh7+ Kf8 33. Qxg6 {. Times: 2.19-2.26.
--- Many were surprised by the speed with which Black's position was
transformed into ruins. The instantaneous switching of attacking forces from
one wing to another became my patent method - a distinguishing feature of my
playing style. --- In the 2nd round I had Black against Psakhis, who had also
started with a win. And, employing the Nimzo-Indian Defence for virtually the
first time in my life, from the opening I obtained an excellent position. But
then, instead of comfortably making a draw, I was suddenly obsessed by some
tactical mirages... More than a quarter of a century later, Lev Psakhis, who
had long since moved to Israel, remembered with pleasure that crazy game: 'The
most important events of the tournament occurred in the 2nd round. I had White
against Kasparov. Just imagine: the Soviet champion against a player who was
rated in the top three or four in the world. We arrived at the game, both
smiling a little, and we shook hands. At the time we were on the most friendly
terms. I began with 1 d4. Kasparov looked at me in considerable surprise.
After all, not long before, at a training session before the junior world team
championship, we had played numerous blitz games, and he roughly imagined what
I would play against him in the King's Indian, which he used to employ at that
time. He thought for some 6-7 minutes and played 1...e6. It was my turn to be
slightly surprised. I thought to myself, what did he have in mind if I were to
play 2 e4? I realised that he wouldn't choose the French, but would play 2...c5, leading either to a Sicilian, or to something closed, where I altogether
had no experience. After about five minutes' thought I played 2 c4, and he
replied 2...Nf6. I didn't know what to do. If 3 Nf3 he would go into a Modern
Benoni, and I would be unable to play the variation which I had prepared
against the Queen's Indian. My knowledge was clearly lacking. I played 3 Nc3,
he went 3...Bb4, and we transposed into a Nimzo-Indian, having each spent
about 20 minutes! After which we both sat feeling sweaty and a little
frightened. But while he was not an expert on the Nimzo-Indian with Black, he
had at least prepared it, whereas I knew absolutely nothing. After ending up
slightly worse with White, I realised in good time that I had to play for
simplification.} (33. -- {'It has to be said that I already knew Garik quite
well and I did not assess him as everyone else did. As a chess player he was a
quite brilliant tactician, but at the same time he remained human and he made
mistakes, which, however, occurred extremely rarely. In positional play
Kasparov acted like a machine, and at the age of 10-11 he already had an
excellent feeling for which piece to play where and at what moment. I think
that he was no weaker as a positional player, which very many people simply
did not realise. To compete with him in tactics was an incredibly difficult
task. Therefore, when in our game he initiated some incredible complications,
the play began to resemble roulette. We both spent a long time calculating
variations, and after the 24th move we each had about two minutes left to the
time control in an incredibly complicated position, with the tension only
increasing. From the 18th to the 24th moves any inaccuracy by either side
could have led to collapse. He sacrificed a piece, some savage pins resulted,
but in the end his position was hopeless, and we were simply bashing the clock.
When by somewhere around move 45 I guessed that the time control had been
reached, I waited for my flag to fall and said that I was adjourning the game.
After this Kasparov resigned.' --- A deserved, but very painful defeat.
Forgetting myself, I had begun playing in the same, excessively 'creative'
manner as in Tilburg! The loss sobered me up: I conducted the following games
in a different, more restrained style, mainly resorting to tactics only 'at
the demand' of the position. No less critical was my 3rd round game with Artur
Yusupov, a rival of mine since junior tournaments. As Black he chose a rare
line of the Bogo-Indian - 1 d4 Nf6 2 c4 e6 3 Nf3 Bb4+ 4 Bd2 a5 (4...Qe7 - Game
No.69) 5 g3 0-0 6 Bg2 b6 7 0-0 Ba6 - and set up a solid defence. Not yet
having come to after the previous day's knock-down, on the 17th move I
committed an unjustified weakening and then 'in desperation' I sacrificed a
pawn.}) 1-0

[Event "64: 49th USSR Championship, Frunze"]
[Site "?"]
[Date "1981.11.29"]
[Round "3"]
[White "Kasparov, G."]
[Black "Yusupov, A."]
[Result "1-0"]
[ECO "E15"]
[Annotator "Garry Kasparov"]
[PlyCount "77"]
[EventDate "1981.??.??"]
[Source "Everyman Chess"]
[SourceDate "2012.11.28"]

1. d4 Nf6 2. c4 e6 3. Nf3 Bb4+ 4. Bd2 a5 5. g3 O-O 6. Bg2 b6 7. O-O Ba6 8. Qc2
Nc6 9. Bg5 Be7 10. a3 h6 11. Bxf6 Bxf6 12. Rd1 Qe7 13. e3 Rae8 14. Nfd2 g5 15.
Nc3 Bg7 16. Nb5 Qd8 17. f4 Ne7 18. Nf3 Nf5 19. Qf2 c6 20. Nc3 gxf4 21. gxf4
Bxc4 22. e4 Nd6 23. Ne5 f5 $6 {(19)} ({After} 23... Ba6 $1 {White's
compensation for the pawn would have been rather problematic, except that after
} 24. Kh1 {, of course, Black should not play} f5 $6 ({but simply} 24... Kh8 {
(h7)} 25. Rg1 Rg8) 25. Rg1 fxe4 $6 26. Bxe4 {(suggested by me in 'Informator')}
({or} 26. Nxe4 {with an attack.})) 24. Nxc4 {(2)} Nxc4 25. b3 (25. e5 $6 b5 $1
{.}) 25... Nd6 26. e5 {Having cramped Black's position, I gained a new lease
of life, since I realised that his extra pawn no longer played a particular
role and the position was one of dynamic balance.} Nc8 {(6) A logical
positional move: Black prepares ...Ne7 or ...b6-b5 and ...Nb6.} ({After} 26...
Nf7 27. Bf3 {followed by Bh5, Kh1 and Rg1, although the black knight is closer
to its king, White has an excellent game: he simply doubles rooks on the
g-file, and may also be able to attack the b6-pawn by Na4.}) (26... Ne4 $6 27.
Bxe4 $1 {.}) 27. Bf3 Kh7 28. Bh5 {(4)} ({The immediate} 28. Kh1 {and Rg1-g3
also came into consideration.}) 28... Re7 {(3)} 29. Kh1 Rg8 $2 {(4)} ({In
'Informator' I rightly condemned this move, weakening Black's control of f5,
and gave the variation} 29... Bh8 $1 30. Rg1 Rg7 31. Rxg7+ Bxg7 32. Rg1 Qe7 33.
Qg3 Rg8 34. Nb1 {'with the idea of Nd2-f3-h4'.} ({it is probably better to play
} 34. Na4 $5 Qf8 (34... Qxa3 $2 35. Nc5 $1 {and Bf7}) 35. Rg2 {followed by
Nb2-d3 with an unclear game}) 34... Qf8 $1 {(Stohl)} 35. Nd2 Ne7 {(with the
accompanying threat of ...Bxe5) it is not easy to carry out this idea.}) 30.
Rg1 Bh8 {Now this natural retreat (with the intention of ...Reg7) allows a
very pretty combination. But what was there to do?} ({If} 30... Bf8 {, then}
31. Rxg8 ({against my 'Informator' move} 31. Qh4 {it is dangerous to reply} Qc7
({but after} 31... Re8 $5 32. Qh3 Re7 {all the same White has nothing better
than} 33. Rxg8 Kxg8 34. Qh4 $1) 32. Bg6+ $1) 31... Kxg8 32. Qh4 $1 {'with a
strong attack' (Stohl), for example:} Qc7 33. Rg1+ Kh7 $6 (33... Rg7 $2 34. Qf6
) (33... Bg7 $2 34. Ne2 Qb7 35. Bf3 Qa6 {is more resilient, although here too
White retains the initiative}) 34. h3 $1 {followed by d4-d5 or Ne2.}) 31. Ne4
$3 {(11) A paradoxical stroke, which reminded me of the finish to the game
Fischer-Panno (Buenos Aires 1970), where White landed an equally unexpected
blow with his bishop - 28 Be4!! (Game No.80 in Volume IV of 'My Great
Predecessors'). True, that combination was an entirely winning one, whereas
here, as we will see, Black can still resist.} fxe4 {(5) The knight has to be
taken - otherwise 32 Nf6+.} (31... Rxg1+ $2 32. Rxg1 fxe4 {is incorrect in
view of} 33. Bg6+ Kg8 34. Bf7+ $1 Kxf7 35. Qg2 {(g3) with unavoidable mate.})
32. f5 $1 {This is the whole point: the f-pawn is included in the attack. When
I was considering 31 Ne4, I did not work out all the possible variations to
the end, but I sensed that here there had to be something!} Rg5 $2 {(10) The
sudden change of scene produced a startling effect: in time-trouble Artur
cracked under the pressure and promptly committed a decisive mistake.} (32...
Reg7 $2 33. Bg6+) ({or} 32... e3 $2 33. Qc2 {would also have been bad.}) ({The
only defence was} 32... Qf8 $1 33. f6 $1 ({the 'Informator' line} 33. Rxg8 Kxg8
34. f6 {is inaccurate in view of} Bxf6 $1 35. exf6 Rg7 $1 36. Qf4 Rg5) 33...
Bxf6 $1 ({but not} 33... Reg7 $2 34. Rxg7+ Bxg7 ({or} 34... Rxg7 35. Qc2) 35.
f7 $1) 34. Qxf6 $1 (34. exf6 $6 Reg7 $1) 34... Reg7 35. Bg6+ Kh8 (35... Rxg6 $6
36. Rxg6) 36. Raf1 Qxf6 (36... Qe7 $6 37. Rf4 $1) 37. exf6 Rxg6 38. Rxg6 Kh7 $1
{(an important resource)} 39. Rxg8 ({or} 39. Rg2 Rxg2 40. Kxg2 Kg8 41. Kg3 Kf7
42. Kf4 Nd6 43. Ke5 Nf5 44. Kxe4 Kxf6) 39... Kxg8 40. Rg1+ Kf7 41. Rg7+ Kxf6
42. Rxd7 Ne7 {and with two pawns for the exchange Black can hope to hold out
in this somewhat inferior ending.}) 33. Rxg5 {(3)} hxg5 34. f6 {Now it's all
over.} Kh6 ({Black is also lost after} 34... Qf8 35. fxe7) ({or} 34... Re8 35.
Qe2 $1 {with the threat of Bf7.}) 35. fxe7 {(4) Regaining the material, and
remaining the exchange ahead and with an attack. In addition, Black's minor
pieces are out of play.} Qxe7 (35... Nxe7 36. Qf7 $1 Bg7 ({or} 36... Qg8 37.
Qxe7 Kxh5 38. Qxd7 {was also hopeless for Black}) 37. Rf1 {.}) 36. Bf7 $1 {(2)
There is nothing to prevent White carrying out the final attack with the
inclusion of his queen. The threat is Rf1 and Qe2-h5+.} d6 37. Rf1 g4 38. Bxe6
{I could not refrain from this tactical stroke;} ({although} 38. Qg3 $1 Qg5 39.
h4 $1 {would also have forced rapid capitulation.}) 38... Qxe6 39. Qh4+ ({And
as he was playing} 39. Qh4+ Kg7 {Black lost on time - but all the same he
would have resigned after} 40. Rf6 {. Times: 1.58-2.30.}) (39. -- {Inspired
by this pretty rout, I made a powerful spurt, confidently winning against
Mikhalchishin, Beliavsky, Tseshkovsky and Dolmatov. Especially important was
the win in a protracted positional battle against one of the tournament
favourites Alexander Beliavsky - 1980 USSR co-champion and the victor at
Tilburg 1981 (however, in Frunze he was not in his best form). --- To my
surprise I discovered that after the loss in the 2nd round I had managed to
repeat the record of Kupreichik, established in the 1979 USSR Championship:
five wins in a row! This, like my ultimate success, was greatly helped by my
avoidance of time-trouble - a terrible enemy, which had pursued me for a whole
year. An excellent start - 6 out of 7, but alongside was Psakhis, ready at any
moment to 'overtake on the bend'.}) (39. -- {I played the next four rounds
beneath criticism: 1½ points against opponents who were not performing very
well in the tournament (I also experienced similar slumps in the USSR
championships of 1978 and 1979). At first - very difficult draws with Kuzmin
and Kupreichik. Both games were adjourned in cheerless positions for me, and
on the resumption, which took place after the 9th round, I saved them with
enormous difficulty. Thanks to this I nevertheless retained the lead: Kasparov
- 7 out of 9; Psakhis - 6½; Romanishin - 5½. --- But in the 10th round I
lost to Gulko, and in the 11th I drew with Agzamov after simply blundering
away an extra pawn. And here I discovered that I was half a point ahead - of
Romanishin, but Psakhis was now a point ahead and was confidently heading for
his second gold medal! --- Fortunately, I was able to make a new spurt,
winning three games in a row: with Black against Yudasin (one of my five
Sicilian wins over Leonid), and then with White against Timoshchenko (see the
following game) and Dorfman. --- In these two twin games there was a sharp
analytical dispute in the Botvinnik Variation, which had been revived
precisely that year. The first to challenge me was Gennady Timoshchenko, the
32-year-old grandmaster from Novosibirsk, who soon became one of my seconds 
(but in 1993 he moved to Slovakia).}) 1-0

[Event "65: 49th USSR Championship, Frunze"]
[Site "?"]
[Date "1981.12.15"]
[Round "13"]
[White "Kasparov, G."]
[Black "Timoshchenko, G."]
[Result "1-0"]
[ECO "D44"]
[Annotator "Garry Kasparov"]
[PlyCount "85"]
[EventDate "1981.??.??"]
[Source "Everyman Chess"]
[SourceDate "2012.11.28"]

1. d4 d5 2. c4 c6 3. Nf3 Nf6 4. Nc3 e6 5. Bg5 dxc4 6. e4 b5 7. e5 h6 8. Bh4 g5
9. Nxg5 hxg5 10. Bxg5 Nbd7 {At a training session before the championship I
analysed this variation a great deal with Vladimirov (at that time our joint
work was beginning), and as a result I decided that the time had come to fight
against it with White. Earlier, like many others, I had avoided this - the
positions arising were just too irrational, demanding thorough preparation.
But the new, modern approach to the opening was the only correct one: if you
want to gain an advantage in critical variations, you need to take a risk, and
play concretely, move by move.} 11. exf6 ({The alternative is} 11. g3 {. More
details of this and other later variations are given in 'Revolution in the
70s' (pp.308-312).}) 11... Bb7 12. g3 c5 13. d5 Qb6 ({Until the spring of 1981
the main line was} 13... Nb6 14. dxe6 Qxd1+ (14... Bxh1 15. e7 $1) 15. Rxd1
Bxh1 16. e7 a6 (16... Bc6 $5) 17. exf8=Q+ ({but the game Polugayevsky-Torre 
(Moscow 1981) saw the thunderous} 17. h4 $3 Bh6 18. f4 $1 {, when White's pawn
armada proved stronger than the rook (Game No.28 in Volume III of 'My Great
Predecessors'). After this the knight move went almost out of use}) 17... Kxf8
$1 18. Rd6 Rb8 19. Be3 Rh5 $1 20. Be2 Re5 {with good counterplay on the
queenside.}) 14. Bg2 O-O-O 15. O-O b4 16. Na4 ({In the 6th round game
Yusupov-Sveshnikov} 16. Rb1 Bh6 {, occurred, and later practice showed that} ({
so that the best defence is} 16... Qa6 $1 17. dxe6 Bxg2 18. e7 $1 Bxf1 {etc.})
17. Bxh6 Rxh6 18. b3 $1 {is dangerous for Black. As a result, today 16 Rb1 has
the reputation of being a drawing variation, and 16 Na4 is still the focus of
discussions.}) 16... Qb5 ({At that time} 16... Qa6 {was thought to be bad
because of} 17. a3 $1 b3 $2 ({but in the 1990s this line was revived by} 17...
Bxd5 $1 18. Bxd5 Ne5 {(although 16...Qb5 was still considered superior)}) 18.
Nc3 Nb6 19. Qg4 $1 Nxd5 20. Nxd5 Bxd5 21. Bxd5 Rxd5 22. Rad1 {Razuvaev-Vaisser,
Moscow 1981).}) 17. a3 $1 {By opening up the queenside, White emphasises the
insecure position of the black king.} (17. Re1 $6 Nb8 18. Qg4 $2 Bxd5 {
(Zaichik-Timoshchenko, Moscow 1981)}) ({or} 17. dxe6 $6 Bxg2 18. e7 Bxf1 {
(Ubilava-Timoshchenko, Volgodonsk 1981) is unfavourable for him.}) 17... Nb8 ({
The game Kharitonov-Dorfman, played that October in the USSR Championship
First League (Volgodonsk 1981), went} 17... exd5 18. axb4 cxb4 (18... d4 $6 19.
Nxc5) 19. Be3 ({and recently} 19. Bf4 Bh6 {has also been tried (Giri-Smeets,
Wijk aan Zee 2011)}) 19... Nc5 {with unclear play. Later even the fantastic}
20. Qg4+ Rd7 21. Qg7 $6 {occurred (Ivanchuk-Shirov, Wijk aan Zee 1996). --- 17.
..Nb8 was found during that same First League by the joint efforts of
Sveshnikov and Timoshchenko, and was employed a few rounds later in the games
Anikaev-Sveshnikov and Rashkovsky-Timoshchenko. It was these games that
Vladimirov and I had analysed.}) 18. axb4 cxb4 19. Be3 {Following the source
game.} ({But one of two queen moves was objectively better:} 19. Qd4 $5 {(an
idea of the 1990s)} Nc6 20. dxc6 (20. Nb6+ axb6 21. dxc6 Bxc6 {is also unclear,
Carlsen-Smeets, Wijk aan Zee 2010}) 20... Rxd4 21. cxb7+ Kb8 (21... Kc7 $2 22.
Be3 $1 e5 23. Nc3 $1 bxc3 24. bxc3 Bc5 25. cxd4 Bxd4 26. Rfb1 Qc5 27. Ra6 $1 {
with crushing threats, Kamsky-Kramnik, 1st match game, New York 1994}) 22. Be3
e5 {, and modern correspondence games, not without the help of computers,
demonstrate equality for Black in the crazy complications after} 23. b3 $1 c3
$1 24. Rfd1 Bh6 {etc.}) (19. Qg4 $1 Bxd5 (19... Rxd5 $2 20. Rfc1 $1 {,
Dvoyris-Sveshnikov, Sochi 1983}) 20. Rfc1 Nc6 21. Bxd5 Rxd5 22. Rxc4 Rxg5 23.
Qd4 Kb8 24. Rxc6 Rxg3+ 25. fxg3 Qxc6 26. Rd1 {, retaining some initiative 
(Yusupov-Tukmakov, Leningrad 1987).}) 19... Bxd5 20. Bxd5 Rxd5 21. Qe2 Nc6 22.
Rfc1 {This critical position, which occurred in both of the aforementioned
games from the First League, was reached on our board within 20 minutes after
the start of play.} ({Following} 22. Rfc1 {,} -- ({, Sveshnikov played badly -
} 22... Kb7 $2 {and after} 23. Rxc4 Na5 24. b3 $1 Bd6 ({not} 24... Nxb3 $2 25.
Qc2) ({or} 24... Rdh5 $6 25. Nb2) 25. Qa2 {he ran into serious problems} (25.
Nb2 {is also strong, and if} a6 {, then} 26. Rxa5 $1 Qxa5 27. Na4 {with a pawn
for the exchange and an attack.})) ({. Timoshchenko tried} 22... c3 $5 23. Qxb5
Rxb5 {, but with a bold piece sacrifice -} 24. Nxc3 $5 ({perhaps, therefore,} 
24. bxc3 $5 b3 25. Rcb1 {is more promising, with very unusual play and
somewhat the better chances for White}) 24... bxc3 25. Rxc3 {Rashkovsky
stunned his opponent, and after} Kd7 (25... Kb7 $6 26. Rac1 $1) 26. Ra6 Nd8 27.
Rxa7+ Ke8 $2 ({but the cool-headed} 27... Nb7 $1 {would have enabled him to
maintain the balance}) 28. Rc8 {Black ended up in a difficult position. --- In
anticipation of 22...c3, I was intending to sacrifice my knight, but
Timoshchenko 'indulged in' another novelty.})) 22... Na5 $5 (22... Ne5 $1 {is
far safer, but the chess world would learn of this only eighteen months later 
(Game No.82). --- After making his move, my opponent stood up and with a proud
expression began strolling around the other boards. I had to switch urgently
from my polished home analysis to specific, calculating play. My wavering and
the calculation of variations took a great deal of time. Intuitively I
realised that, to cast doubts on Black's risky play, extreme measures were
needed, i.e. again the sacrifice of a piece. So, forward, into the attack!})
23. b3 $1 {(53)} ({After} 23. Bxa7 Kb7 24. Be3 (24. Nb6 $2 c3 $1) 24... Nb3 25.
Nb6 Nxc1 26. Rxc1 c3 27. Nc4 cxb2 28. Qxb2 Bh6 {White has no more than
equalising compensation for the exchange.}) 23... c3 {(3)} ({Black would have
lost after} 23... Nxb3 $2 24. Rxc4+ Kb7 ({or} 24... Kd7 25. Bxa7 Nxa1 26. Nb6+)
25. Qc2 $1 {. But now White has to give up his knight, without having any
forced solution to the position.}) 24. Nxc3 $1 bxc3 25. Rxc3+ Kd7 (25... Kb7 $2
{was bad:} 26. Qc2 Bd6 (26... Qd7 27. Rc1) 27. b4 $1 {with decisive threats (}
Nc6 28. Rxc6 $1 {)}) ({as was} 25... Kb8 $2 26. Qc2 Qd7 (26... Qb7 27. Rc1) 27.
Bxa7+ $1 Kb7 28. Be3 Bb4 ({or} 28... Bd6 29. b4 Bxb4 (29... Be5 30. bxa5 $1)
30. Rb1 Nc6 31. Rc4 Rb5 32. Rc5 $1 Rh5 33. Rxh5 Rxh5 34. Bc5 {and wins}) 29.
Rc4 $1 Qd6 30. Qe4 Nc6 31. Rxc6 $1 {. Therefore the black king makes for the
centre under the cover of its army.}) 26. Qc2 {(3)} Bd6 $2 {(5) Although no
one noticed, this was the decisive mistake!} ({It was only 15 years later, in
a correspondence game (Germany 1996), that} 26... Nc6 $1 27. Rc1 Nd8 {was
played, and after} 28. Rc7+ (28. Rc8 Bd6 29. b4 Be5 30. Rc5 $1 Rxc5 31. Bxc5 {
is more energetic, with an attack compensating for the material deficit, but,
alas, no more than that...}) 28... Ke8 29. Rxa7 Rhh5 $1 {(with the threats of ...Rhf5xf6 and ...Bc5) White gradually lost, after failing to find the deeply
hidden resource} 30. b4 $1 Rhf5 (30... Bxb4 31. Rb1 $1) 31. Ra8 $1 Rxf6 32. Bg5
$3 Rxg5 33. Rxd8+ Kxd8 34. Qc8+ Ke7 35. Rc7+ Kd6 36. Rc1 $1 {with unavoidable
perpetual check.}) 27. Rc1 {(9)} Qb7 {(3) Both defending, and creating the
terrible threat of ...Rxh2!.} ({If} 27... Qb4 {White wins by} 28. Rc8 $1 Rd1+
29. Rxd1 Rxc8 30. Qh7 Ke8 (30... Rf8 31. Bh6) 31. Rd4 $1 {etc. Now it appears
that White's attack has come to a standstill, but he has a latent resource -
again, as on the 23rd move, the b-pawn joins the battle.}) 28. b4 $1 {The only
way to win.} ({It transpires that} 28. b4 Rxh2 $2 ({nor does} 28... Rb5 $2 29.
bxa5 Rxh2 {in view of} 30. Rc6 $1 {winning}) {, does not work because of} 29.
Qa4+ $1 {. It would appear that in his analysis Timoshchenko had overlooked
this nuance, since here he stopped to think.}) 28... Qxb4 $1 {(12) Played
without prejudices: Black realises that the check on c7 cannot in itself cause
him any problems (the realisation of this on the 26th move was probably
hindered by him being carried away by the idea of ...Qb7 with the threat of ...Rxh2).} 29. Rb1 $1 {(25)} ({Timoshchenko, like all those watching the game,
was expecting} 29. Rc7+ Bxc7 30. Qxc7+ Ke8 31. Bc5 {. I also studied this
possibility, but came to the conclusion that after} Qb7 $1 32. Qxa5 Rhh5 $1 {
it is hard for White to count on any real advantage:} 33. Qa3 Rhf5 34. Be7 Rd4
35. h4 Rfd5 36. Kh2 Rf5 {etc. --- However, I couldn't help feeling that there
was something more in the position, and after a long think I conceived an idea
which demanded an introductory move by the rook. Black's reply is forced.})
29... Qg4 {(6) The forcing play has come to an end, and White's next move
will decide whether he is able to create new threats, or Black will escape
with a slight fright. And I again thought for a long time, thereby
'acknowledging' that the attack was being conducted largely intuitively.} (
29... Qg4 {. Before making the planned move, it was important for me to
convince myself that other continuations were inadequate:} 30. -- (30. Bf4 $2
Bxf4 31. Qa4+ Kd6 32. h3 $1 ({weaker is} 32. Qb4+ Ke5 $1) ({or} 32. Re1 e5 $1
33. Qb4+ Ke6) 32... Qg5 $1 33. Qa3+ Ke5 34. Rb4 Qh6 $1) ({, or} 30. f3 $6 Qf5
$1 ({but not} 30... Qh3 $2 {on account of the spectacular} 31. Rb7+ $3 Nxb7 32.
Qa4+ Kd8 33. Bb6+ $1) 31. Qa4+ Kd8 32. Rbc1 Qxf6 33. Qa1 Qe5 ({or} 33... Rh6 {
. and the black king escapes from the pursuit. --- As is apparent from this
last variation, Black need not fear the queen check at a4, as long as his king
can calmly retreat to d8. This means that White should not begrudge spending a
precious tempo on the elimination of the a7-pawn, which is depriving his
bishop of the b6-square!}))) 30. Bxa7 $3 {(20) This paradoxical decision
proves to be optimal - the computer decision, it can be said: a simple capture,
although it is not a matter of the pawn, but of the b6-square. Now the threat
of 31 f3 is deadly: if the queen moves off the 4th rank, White gives mate by
32 Qa4+ Kd8 33 Bb6+. By this point I had little more than twenty minutes left
on my clock, whereas my opponent had used less than forty. But now it was his
turn to think...} e5 {(26) The most natural reply: Timoshchenko decided to
use the tempo granted for the creation of an escape square for his king.} ({
Another try is} 30... Be5 {(Game No.66).}) 31. Qa2 $1 {(3) Again the only
move, an intuitive one! It unexpectedly transpires that Black is unable to
solve a very simple question: what to do with the rook on d5? Here Gennady now
sensed just how dangerous his position was, and he thought for almost an hour
- after his next move he had less than fifteen minutes to the time control.}
Rd1+ {(57) The best chance.} ({Other moves would not have saved Black:} 31...
Ke6 32. f3 Qh5 {(h3)} 33. Rb2) (31... Qh5 32. h4 $1 e4 33. Qa4+) (31... Qh3 32.
f3 Qh7 33. Be3 $1 {(cf. the variation with 31...Qf5)}) (31... Qf5 {(a cunning
move)} 32. -- ({, now} 32. Re1 $2 {is a weak reply in view of} Qh3 $1 ({if} 
32... Ke6 $2 {Timoshchenko gave} 33. Rd1 e4 34. f3 $1 Bxg3 ({while if} 34...
Qh5 35. Rd2 $1) 35. hxg3 {and wins}) 33. f4 Qxh2+ 34. Qxh2 Rxh2 35. Kxh2 Bb4 $1
) (32. Qxd5 $4 Qxb1+ 33. Kg2 Qb7 {.}) ({, as is} 32. Rb7+ $2 Nxb7 33. Qxd5 Qb1+
$1 34. Kg2 Nd8 35. Rb3 Qf5 $1) ({, but the quiet move} 32. f3 $3 {proves
decisive, for example:} Ra8 (32... e4 $2 33. Qa4+ Ke6 34. fxe4) ({, or} 32...
Qh7 {(the most resilient)} 33. Be3 $1 Qf5 (33... Ke6 34. Rb5 $1 ({but not} 34.
Rd1 $4 Qxh2+ $1)) 34. Bf2 {, and Black has no defence}) 33. Ra1 $1 {with the
simple threat of Qxd5 and Rxa5.})) 32. Rxd1 Qxd1+ 33. Kg2 Qh5 $6 {(2) But
this time-trouble attempt to confuse matters loses by force.} ({A more
resilient defence, which no one saw, was the computer reply} 33... Nb3 $1 {
(interference!), after which White could either go into an endgame -} 34. Qxb3
({or continue the attack -} 34. Rxb3 Qd5+ 35. f3 Ra8 36. Qa4+ $5 Ke6 37. Rb2 $1
Kxf6 38. Qh4+ {, condemning the opponent to a difficult defence a pawn down})
34... Qxb3 35. Rxb3 {, although after} Ke6 {sooner or later Black would pick
up the f6-pawn, retaining drawing chances in view of the limited material. But
the fight would still have continued!}) 34. Qa4+ $1 {(5) Another accurate
move.} (34. h4 $2 {was far weaker in view of} Nc6 $1 {.}) 34... Ke6 35. h4 $1 {
It was this obvious move, killing Black's counterplay, that Timoshchenko
overlooked. Incidentally, whereas up to the 30th move it was White who had
been short of time, now the roles were reversed: Black was in time-trouble,
whereas White still had a whole fifteen minutes on his clock!} Qe2 (35... e4
36. Qxe4+ Qe5 37. Qg4+ Qf5 38. Re3+ Be5 39. Qa4 $1) ({or} 35... Nb7 36. Rf3 (
36. g4 $5) 36... Nd8 37. Bb6 {was also hopeless.}) (35... Kxf6 36. Qxa5 Kg7 {
was slightly better, but after} 37. Qd5 $1 {White would build up a decisive
attack.}) 36. Qxa5 Ra8 (36... Qe4+ 37. Kh2 (37. Rf3 $5) 37... Ra8 {is more
resilient, although here too Black's days are numbered:} 38. Qa6 $1 Qd4 $5 39.
Qa2+ $1 Qd5 40. Qxd5+ Kxd5 41. Be3 {etc.}) 37. Qa4 $1 {(2) An invasion on the
light squares! The pursuit of the black king is resumed with renewed vigour.}
Kxf6 38. Qd7 (38. Rf3+ $5 Ke7 39. h5 $1 {.}) 38... Kg7 {(3)} 39. Rf3 {(2)} Qc4
40. Qxd6 Rxa7 41. Qxe5+ Kh7 42. Rf5 {(2) In search of shelter the king has
crossed the entire board under fire by the white pieces, and there is nowhere
further to run.} Qc6+ {A 'spite' check.} 43. Kh2 {. Times: 2.25-2.29. ---
This spectacular win enabled me to catch Psakhis, who that day played a draw 
(we were both on 9½ out of 13). Immediately after the round, debates flared
up: was the piece sacrifice correct, and where could Black have played more
strongly? These questions concerned many of the participants in the
championship. A lively analysis after the game involved not only Timoshchenko
and me, but also Dorfman, and Sveshnikov, who as usual was showing where and
what should have been moved. His voice resounded louder than the others, and
the variations he demonstrated looked convincing enough (no one believed that
the sacrifice 24 Nxc3! was winning, but also no one had seen 26...Nc6!), and
in the end the grandmaster consultation decided that 30...e5 was the decisive
mistake, and that 30...Be5 would have parried the attack. All my attempts to
refute this were unsuccessful, and Sveshnikov publicly declared that he was
prepared to defend the position after 30...Be5 against me in the 16th round!
--- On returning to the hotel, for a long time I was unable to get to sleep.
Thoughts about the game just played would not leave me in peace. Was 30...Be5
really such a good move that it killed White's entire plan?! Without
interruption I analysed this position in my head, and only by two in the
morning did I find peace: analysis showed irrefutably that 30...Be5 also did
not save Black (I remember even that, when this happened, I said to my mother:
'Found it!'). It only remained to await the penultimate, 16th round, but life
decreed otherwise...} 1-0

[Event "66: 49th USSR Championship, Frunze"]
[Site "?"]
[Date "1981.12.16"]
[Round "14"]
[White "Kasparov, G."]
[Black "Dorfman, I."]
[Result "1-0"]
[ECO "D44"]
[Annotator "Garry Kasparov"]
[PlyCount "85"]
[EventDate "1981.??.??"]
[Source "Everyman Chess"]
[SourceDate "2012.11.28"]

{The next day I played the 29-year-old Lvov grandmaster Iossif Dorfman, USSR
co-champion in 1977 and also one of my future seconds (in the early 1990s he
moved to France). The spectators assembled in the spacious hall of the Sports
Palace followed with mounting astonishment the movements of the pieces on one
of the large demonstration boards. Within 45 minutes the familiar critical
position after White's 30th move was reached.} 1. d4 d5 2. c4 e6 3. Nf3 Nf6 4.
Nc3 c6 5. Bg5 dxc4 6. e4 {(5)} b5 7. e5 h6 8. Bh4 g5 9. Nxg5 hxg5 10. Bxg5 Nbd7
11. exf6 {(2)} Bb7 12. g3 c5 13. d5 Qb6 14. Bg2 O-O-O 15. O-O b4 16. Na4 Qb5
17. a3 Nb8 18. axb4 cxb4 19. Be3 Bxd5 20. Bxd5 Rxd5 21. Qe2 Nc6 22. Rfc1 Na5 $5
(22... Ne5 $1 {- Game No.82.}) 23. b3 c3 24. Nxc3 bxc3 25. Rxc3+ Kd7 26. Qc2
Bd6 $2 (26... Nc6 $1 {.}) 27. Rc1 Qb7 {(10)} 28. b4 Qxb4 29. Rb1 Qg4 30. Bxa7 {
The chief arbiter of the tournament, Mikhail Yudovich: 'An amazing occurrence!
During many, many years of participating in major competitions, I do not
recall anything similar: up to the 30th (!) move the players repeated a game
played in the previous round.' I too did not believe my eyes...} Be5 {(5)} ({
This move, suggested instead of} 30... e5 {(Game No.65), was also made quite
quickly by Dorfman. Having taken Sveshnikov's word for it, he had not found
time to delve deeply into the position and, it would seem, he began to see the
light only after my reply.}) 31. Rc5 $1 {(1)} ({Of course, not the suicidal} 
31. f3 $4 Bd4+ $1 32. Kh1 ({or} 32. Bxd4 Qxd4+ 33. Kg2 (33. Kh1 Rdh5 $1) 33...
Qd2+ 34. Kg1 Qxc2 35. Rxc2 Rh6 {and ...Rxf6}) 32... Qxg3 33. Qa4+ Kd8 34. Rb8+
Qxb8 35. Bxb8 Bxc3 {. The move in the game is directed in the first instance
at the exchange of the rook on d5 - the black king's main defender.}) 31...
Rxc5 {(21) Forced;} ({mate would have been unavoidable after, say,} 31... Ra8
$2 32. Rxa5 $1 Rxa5 33. Rb7+ Ke8 34. Re7+ Kf8 35. Qh7 {.}) 32. Bxc5 $1 {My
night-time discovery!} ({The fact that the quiet 'backwards' capture was
stronger than} 32. Qxc5 {, and that now Black has no defence, was not easy to
grasp (I don't know whether I would have found it at the board if the previous
day Timoshchenko had played 30...Be5). In a joint blitz analysis we only
looked at the pseudo-active} Nc6 $1 33. Rb7+ Bc7 34. Bb6 Rc8 {, when the
attack peters out. --- On encountering this surprise, Dorfman spent a full
hour seeking a way to save the game, but it was already too late...}) 32... Nc6
{(65)} ({While the opponent was considering his move, I checked my home
calculations (before this I had not reached this position on a board, but only
in my head), and I ascertained that White also wins after other replies:} 32...
Rc8 33. Qd2+ {and Qxa5}) (32... Qc4 33. Qd2+ Kc6 34. Rb6+ $1 Kxc5 35. Qxa5+ Kd4
36. Rb4) (32... Bc7 33. Qd3+ Kc8 34. Rb4 $1 Qf5 35. Qa6+ Kd7 36. Rd4+) (32...
Rb8 33. Rd1+ Ke8 34. Bd4 $1 (34. f4 {is also strong}) 34... Bd6 35. Ba7 $1 Rd8
36. Bb6 $1 {.}) ({The computer also considers} 32... Qf5 $5 33. Qd1+ $1 Kc8 34.
Rc1 $1 Qe4 {(ignoring the discovered check)} 35. Bd6+ Kb7 36. Qf1 $1 Qd5 37.
Rb1+ Ka7 38. Rb5 Bxd6 39. Rxd5 exd5 40. Qb5 Nb7 41. Qxd5 {, when the queen and
three pawns overrun Black's scattered army. With a computer White wins easily
in all variations, but at the time this was far from obvious.}) 33. Qd3+ $1 Kc8
{(6)} ({The lesser evil was probably to go into an endgame two pawns down by} 
33... Nd4 34. Rd1 Kc7 (34... Rh4 $2 35. Qb5+ Kc8 36. Qa6+ Kc7 37. Bb6+ $1) 35.
Bxd4 Qxd4 36. Qxd4 Bxd4 37. Rxd4 Rh6 {, although after} 38. Kg2 {all the same
Black's position is hopeless (} Rxf6 $2 39. Rf4 $1 {).}) (33... Bd4 $2 34. Rb7+
{.}) 34. Rd1 {(22)} ({There was a pretty win by} 34. Qa6+ Kd7 35. Rb7+ Bc7 36.
Rxc7+ $1 Kxc7 37. Qb6+ Kc8 38. Qxc6+ Kb8 39. Qb6+ Kc8 40. Qa6+ Kc7 41. Bb6+ Kc6
(41... Kd6 42. Ba7+ $1 Ke5 43. f4+ Kxf6 44. Bd4+ {and Bxh8}) 42. Ba7+ $1 Kc7
43. Qb6+ Kd7 44. Qb5+ Kd6 45. Bc5+ Ke5 46. Bd4+ $1 Ke4 (46... Kxd4 47. Qb4+ {
and Qxg4}) 47. f3+ $1 {. I saw these variations, but I preferred to make a
move which firmly guaranteed a terribly strong attack.}) 34... Nb8 ({If} 34...
Rd8 {White mates by} 35. Qa6+ {.}) 35. Rc1 $1 {Emphasising the helplessness of
the black pieces, which are unable to assist their king.} Qa4 {(6) The
expiatory bishop sacrifice made by Dorfman merely delays the end slightly.} 36.
Bd6+ Nc6 37. Bxe5 Rd8 {(2)} 38. Qb1 $1 {(4) Renewing the mating threats.} Rd5
{(5)} 39. Qb8+ {(2)} Kd7 40. Qc7+ Ke8 41. Qxc6+ Qxc6 42. Rxc6 Rxe5 43. Rc8+ ({
In view of} 43. Rc8+ Kd7 44. Rf8 {. Times: 0.55-2.26.}) (43. -- {An
unforgettable two-day battle! As a result I reached 10½ out of 14 and again
burst half a step ahead. But in the 15th and 16th rounds I slowed down, making
far from peaceful draws with Romanishin and Sveshnikov (who 'in the light of
newly discovered circumstances' deemed it wise to avoid the Botvinnik
Variation by playing 5...h6). But Psakhis scored two crushing wins, moved up
to 'plus eight' and before the last round was leading me by half a point. This
was his finest hour! I remember being terribly upset by the fact that my 'plus
seven' would guarantee me only second place. --- Psakhis's position before the
finish was clearly preferable for the added reason that he had White against
the championship debutant Agzamov, whereas I was paired with Black against
Tukmakov, who was also invincible in this tournament, and was two points
behind in third place, while a draw would give him the bronze medal and a
place in the next Premier League! Few doubted that Psakhis would be the sole
winner, but last rounds do not always obey the laws of logic. --- In this
situation Lev took a highly committing and, perhaps, not the most correct
decision - to play for a win against Agzamov. He sacrificed a pawn and
initiated a very complicated, lengthy struggle, which inspired me: now any
result was possible in their game, which meant that my chances of catching my
rival were also improved. Especially since Agzamov parried the onslaught, kept
his extra pawn, and declined the offer of a draw...}) 1-0

[Event "67: 49th USSR Championship, Frunze"]
[Site "?"]
[Date "1981.12.21"]
[Round "17"]
[White "Tukmakov, V."]
[Black "Kasparov, G."]
[Result "0-1"]
[ECO "E74"]
[Annotator "Garry Kasparov"]
[PlyCount "58"]
[EventDate "1981.??.??"]
[Source "Everyman Chess"]
[SourceDate "2012.11.28"]

{And so, in the decisive game I was opposed by the 35-year-old Vladimir
Tukmakov, the remarkable Odessa grandmaster and trainer (without his name it
is impossible to imagine modern Ukrainian chess). I have to admit that I
myself found it hard to believe in the possibility with Black of defeating 'to
order' such an experienced tournament fighter, but - the miracle occurred! ---
In the preparations for the duel an active part was played by Vladimirov, who
had arrived specially from Alma-Ata. Nikitin: 'In just one day we had to find
a set-up which in some way would particularly tempt Tukmakov, forcing him
during the game to oscillate between caution and a desire to punish the
opponent for his excessive risk. The best bait for this would be a pawn
sacrifice. A few hours before the start of the round we found an interesting
and highly controversial game, published in the latest Informator, Volume 31.
After spending a couple of hours, Garry considered himself an expert on the
set-up, calmed down and went off for a meal... It was easier to compile the
battle scenario: the maximum concentration, no interest in the other games,
and the continuous building up of the pressure, bringing it to the boil by the
last, fifth hour of play. An hour before the start we unhurriedly set off on
foot. We walked in silence, occasionally making brief exchanges. Garry's
thoughts were already on the stage of the tournament hall.'} 1. d4 Nf6 2. c4 g6
3. Nc3 Bg7 {At this critical moment I turned to the King's Indian Defence - my
old, well-tested weapon.} 4. e4 d6 5. Be2 O-O 6. Bg5 {The Averbakh Variation,
which in those years was popular among the leading Odessa players, does not
promise White much, but it restricts Black's active possibilities.} c5 (6...
Nbd7 {- Game No.76.}) 7. d5 b5 $6 {(2) An audacious and hardly correct pawn
sacrifice.} ({But I didn't want to play} 7... h6 {(Game No.28) with a
relatively clear game, which - and this was important - the opponent was
expecting. For me the situation was unambiguous: all or nothing!}) 8. cxb5 a6
9. a4 $1 {(3)} h6 ({Of course, not} 9... Qa5 $6 10. Bd2 $1 {(Game No.58).
However, my improvement only makes things slightly better for Black.}) 10. Bd2
{(7) A solid move, dictated by White's desire to retain not so much his extra
pawn, as the invulnerability of his position.} (10. Bf4 {was also not bad,
since} g5 {(?!), recommended by me in 'Informator', together with} 11. Bd2 e6
12. dxe6 Bxe6 {, suggested in 'The Test of Time', is dangerous because of} 13.
h4 $1 g4 14. Qc1 Kh7 (14... h5 15. Bh6) 15. Bd3 {with the threat of 16 e5+.})
10... e6 11. dxe6 {(2)} Bxe6 12. Nf3 {(2) White is a sound pawn to the good,
and today I look sadly at my position, not altogether understanding where is
Black's 'active piece play' that was spoken about thirty years ago. But at the
time, sitting opposite Tukmakov, I was radiating composure and confidence.}
axb5 13. Bxb5 ({In 'The Test of Time' I criticised} 13. axb5 $6 {, since after}
Bb3 $1 14. Qc1 Rxa1 15. Qxa1 Qe7 {(?!) 'the e4-pawn is doomed',} ({therefore} 
15... Re8 $1 {is more accurate}) 16. O-O Nxe4 {, but in fact here White has
quite good prospects:} 17. Nxe4 Qxe4 18. Re1 {etc.}) 13... Na6 {(3)} 14. O-O {
(5)} Nc7 {(3)} ({The leap} 14... Nb4 {did not appeal to me because of} 15. Be3
{, preventing ...d6-d5.}) 15. Re1 {(6)} (15. Be2 {would have retained the
bishop, but allowed} d5 16. exd5 Nfxd5 {, although in this case too Black has
only slight compensation for the pawn. With 15 Re1 White tries for more. It
would appear that the draw, which would have satisfied Tukmakov in the purely
competitive sense, had already ceased to be the guideline for him.}) 15... Nxb5
{(9)} 16. Nxb5 ({The simple} 16. axb5 {would have opened the way to numerous
exchanges and the cherished drawing haven - after, say,} d5 17. exd5 Rxa1 ({or
} 17... Nxd5 18. Rxa8 Qxa8 19. Ne4) 18. Qxa1 Nxd5 19. Qa7 {Black would have
been fighting only for a draw. But, apparently, Tukmakov had been seized by
the fervour of the struggle! 'A first, purely psychological achievement by
Black: the snail has been forced to come out of its shell.' (Nikitin)}) 16...
d5 17. exd5 {(3)} Nxd5 18. Ne5 $1 {(7) A strong, ambitious move.} ({After} 18.
Qc2 Nb4 19. Bxb4 cxb4 {Black would have maintained the balance thanks to the
power of his two bishops.}) ({And after} 18. Rc1 {, which I recommended in
'Informator', both} Nb4 {(Stohl)} ({and} 18... Nb6 19. b3 c4 {are good.}))
18... Re8 {(18) Continuing to reproduce the 'Informator' source game.} ({
After some thought, I concluded that} 18... Qh4 $6 {was weak because of} 19.
Qc2 $1 {.}) 19. Rc1 {(8) A new and better move!} ({The aforementioned A.Petrosian-Arbakov game (Moscow 1981) went} 19. Qc1 Qh4 $6 20. Qxc5 (20. a5 $5 {
, and in our preparations, not seeing anything promising here for Black, we
found an improvement - 19...Bf5!.})) ({I was also concerned about} 19. Nc4 $5 {
with the threat of an invasion at d6 - for example,} Nb4 {(?)} ({but after} 
19... Qb8 $5 {the position would have been unclear}) 20. Ncd6 Re7 21. Bc3 {
(Stohl) with an obvious advantage for White.}) 19... Bf5 $1 {(10) Sharpening
the position further. Tukmakov now cracks under the intense pressure!} 20. Nc6
$6 {(37)} (20. Ba5 $2 Rxa5 21. Nc6 Rxe1+ 22. Qxe1 {is incorrect because of} Qa8
$1) ({while after} 20. Nc4 $6 Rxe1+ 21. Bxe1 Nf4 22. Qxd8+ Rxd8 {for the first
time Black acquires unpleasant threats.}) ({However,} 20. f4 $5 {would still
have laid claim to an advantage. In 'The Test of Time' I optimistically
asserted that after} g5 (20... f6) ({or} 20... Nc7 {is more solid}) 21. Qh5 Re7
{'a position is reached where White's extra pawn does not play any part'. Alas,
it very much plays a part:} 22. b3 (22. Qf3 $5) 22... Ra6 23. Rxc5 Qb6 24. Rec1
Nxf4 25. Bxf4 gxf4 26. Kh1 {, and Black is fighting only for equality. But
here psychology had an effect: Tukmakov had no wish to cast caution to the
winds, by exposing his king with f2-f4.}) 20... Qd7 $1 {(32)} ({This is better
than} 20... Qb6 {(it is not befitting for the queen to perform the role of
defender of the c5-pawn!)} 21. -- (21. Rxe8+ Rxe8 22. Na5 Rd8 $1) ({, or} 21.
Na5 Rxe1+ (21... Red8 {is also possible}) 22. Qxe1 {- previously I assessed
this position in favour of White, but after} Bd3 23. Nc4 Qc6 24. Ne5 (24. b3
Re8 25. Qd1 Re2 {is dangerous for White}) 24... Bxe5 25. Qxe5 Re8 26. Rxc5 Rxe5
27. Rxc6 Re2 28. Rc8+ Kh7 29. Ba5 Bxb5 30. axb5 Rxb2 {his advantage evaporates.
--- By sacrificing a second pawn, Black diverts the white rook, after which a
significant defect in White's position is suddenly revealed - the weakness of
his back rank.})) 21. Rxc5 {(3)} Rxe1+ 22. Qxe1 {(8)} ({Already the only move
- after} 22. Bxe1 $2 Re8 $1 23. -- ({, White does not have} 23. Rxd5 $2 {
because of} Qxd5 $1) ({, and he is not saved by} 23. g3 $2 Nf4 $1) (23. Bd2 Nf4
$1) (23. Ba5 Nb4 $1) (23. Rc1 Bxb2) ({, or even the most resilient} 23. Ncd4
Nf4 $1 24. Rc1 Bxd4 25. Nxd4 Qxd4 $1 26. Qxd4 Ne2+ 27. Kf1 Nxd4 28. Rd1 Nb3 {
, when the piece for two pawns should bring Black a win.} (28... --))) 22...
Re8 $1 {Playing for a win;} ({this creates far more problems for White than
the direct} 22... Rxa4 23. b4 (23. b3 Re4 $5) 23... Ra1 24. Rc1 Rxc1 25. Qxc1
Be4 {with full compensation for the pawn, perfectly sufficient - for a draw.})
23. Qc1 {(3) Again the only move;} ({after} 23. Qd1 $2) ({or} 23. Be3 {Black
has the decisive} Nf4 $1) ({while if} 23. Qf1 $2 Nb6 $1 24. Be3 Nxa4 25. Rc1
Nxb2 {with a powerful initiative.}) 23... Nb6 $6 {(5) A vexing error, which
gives the opponent a new chance.} (23... Re2 $6 {is also inadequate in view of}
24. h3 $1 {(an escape square for his king - this is what White lacks for
complete happiness!).}) ({However, the balance would have been maintained by} 
23... Re4 $1 {with the terrible threat of ...Bh3!!. If Tukmakov had found the
only defence -} 24. b3 $1 {, I would have had to choose between an immediate
perpetual check -} Bh3 25. gxh3 Qxh3 26. Rc4 Qg4+ {and very unclear play 'for
any of three results' after 24...Kh7!?.}) 24. b3 $1 {(4)} Re2 {(2)} 25. Ba5 $6
{(2) Here I sensed that Tukmakov was not fully aware of the danger
threatening him.} ({He had two other possibilities:} 25. Be3 $6 Bb2 $1 26. Qf1
Bd3 27. Bd4 $1 ({there is nothing else:} 27. Qd1 $2 Bxb5 $1) 27... Rd2 ({or} 
27... Re8 {(e6)} 28. Qxd3 Re1+ 29. Qf1 Qe6 30. Re5 Rxf1+ 31. Kxf1 Qxc6 32. Bxb2
Kh7 {with the idea of ...Nd5 and a probable draw}) 28. Qe1 Re2 29. Qd1 $5 Bxb5
30. Rxb5 Re6 $1 ({not Stohl's variation} 30... Bxd4 31. Qxe2 Qxc6 32. h3) 31.
Rxb6 Bxd4 32. Rb8+ Kh7 33. Rd8 Bxf2+ $1 34. Kxf2 Qxc6 {, and the exposed
position of White's king denies him winning chances.}) (25. Bc3 $1 -- ({, and
in the event of} 25... Rc2 $6 26. Qe1 Bxc3 (26... Be4 $2 27. Ne5 $1 Qe7 28. Rc7
Qe6 29. Nf3 {and wins}) 27. Nxc3 {the move given by me in 'The Test of Time'}
Qe6 {(?), is bad because of} (27... Qd6 {is more resilient, but after} 28. b4
$1 Nxa4 29. Nxa4 Rxc5 30. Nxc5 Qxc6 31. h3 {White simply has an extra passed
pawn}) 28. Qd1 $1 Bg4 (28... Qxb3 29. h3 $1) 29. Qb1 $1 Rb2 30. Qa1 $1 Rxb3 (
30... Qxb3 31. h3 $1 {(threatening Rb5)} Qc2 (31... Be2 32. Qc1 $1) 32. Qe1 $1
Bd7 33. a5 {, and Black cannot hold out}) 31. Nd4 {(Stohl).}) ({. Therefore
the immediate} 25... Bxc3 $1 {is necessary:} 26. Nxc3 (26. Rxc3 $6 Nd5 $1)
26... Re6 $1 27. a5 Qe8 $5 (27... Rxc6 {is also possible}) 28. Re5 Qxc6 29.
Rxe6 Bxe6 30. axb6 Qxb6 31. Qxh6 Bxb3 {, gaining a draw thanks to all the
pawns being on one wing. --- It is hard to say how the play would have
developed after 25 Bc3. Instead of this, Tukmakov took his bishop out of
harm's way and at the same time attacked the knight, but now the activity of
the black pieces increases sharply.})) 25... Be4 $1 {(14) With the obvious
idea of 26 Bxb6? Qg4.} ({I rejected the safe} 25... Bb2 {because of} 26. Qf1 $1
{, when to avoid the worst I would have had to force a draw -} Re6 (26... Bd3
$6 27. Nb4 $1) 27. Nb4 Qd2 $1 28. Nc6 $1 Qd7 $1 {. The move in the game
provokes wild complications, in which it is easy to go wrong. The enormous
energy stored up in the black pieces is about to break out.}) 26. Ne5 {(6) 
Again a natural move, but hardly the best in terms of neutralising the threats.
} ({White should have considered} 26. Qf1 Rb2 $5 (26... Ra2 27. Rc1 Nxa4 {is a
simpler way to draw}) 27. Rc1 $1 (27. Bxb6 $6 {is less good:} Rb1 $1 28. Rc1 $2
Bxg2 $1) 27... Nd5 ({or} 27... Bxc6 28. Bxb6 Rxb3 29. Qc4 {, and Black merely
has good compensation for the material deficit}) 28. Re1 {.}) 26... Qe7 $1 {(8)
Attacking new targets.} 27. Nd4 $2 {(6) By continuing to bring into play the
pieces stuck on the queenside, Tukmakov commits a decisive tactical mistake:
on d4 the knight is subject to various attacks.} ({White had more than one
acceptable defence:} 27. Bxb6 Bxe5 28. Rxe5 $5 Qxe5 29. Bd4 Qe6 30. h3 {with
full compensation for the exchange}) (27. Nf3 $5 {with full compensation for
the exchange} Bxf3 (27... Nd5 $5 28. Nbd4 $1 Ra2 29. Be1 {is equal}) 28. gxf3
Qh4 {, although after} 29. Qf1 $1 Be5 (29... Ra2 $6 30. Bxb6 Ra1 31. Qxa1 Bxa1
32. a5 $1) 30. Rxe5 Rxe5 31. f4 $1 Qxf4 32. Nd4 {White is out of danger}) (27.
Qf1 $1 Ra2 $1 (27... Qxc5 28. Qxe2 Qxe5 29. Bxb6 Qa1+ 30. Qf1 {is problematic})
28. Bxb6 Bxe5 29. Nc3 {, and the best for Black is perpetual check after the
spectacular} Bxh2+ $1 30. Kxh2 Qh4+ 31. Kg1 Bxg2 $1 32. Kxg2 Qg4+ {. --- In
any other game such a draw would have provided enormous creative satisfaction,
but not in this one! Fortunately, my opponent relieved me of the need to seek
illusory chances...}) 27... Ra2 $1 28. Bxb6 {(3)} ({The game ends
catastrophically after} 28. Ndc6 $2 Qxc5 $1) (28. Nef3 $2 Bxd4 29. Nxd4 Qxc5 $1
) ({or} 28. Ndf3 $2 Nd5 $1 29. Nc6 Qf6 {(with the threat of ...Bxf3 and ...Ra1)
} 30. Nd2 Ra1 31. Nxe4 Qb2 $1 32. Bd2 Nc3 $1 {(Stohl).}) 28... Bxe5 {Black has
managed to get rid of his bad knight on b6, by exchanging it for the active
knight on e5, and suddenly all his pieces have become very aggressively placed.
} 29. Qe3 $2 {(13) Confusion. The mass of threats and shortage of time
provoked this 'inexplicable' blunder, which loses the game in one move;} ({as
does} 29. Qxh6 $2 Qxc5 $1 {- here it is, the weakness of the back rank!}) ({
True,} 29. Rxe5 Qxe5 30. f3 Bd3 {etc., would also not have saved White}) ({and
the best defence} 29. Qe1 $1 {would merely have prolonged the resistance and
offered practical chances:} -- (29... Qd6 {(?)} 30. Ne2 {(?)} ({but} 30. Nb5 $1
Qf6 {(e6)} 31. Rxe5 Qxe5 32. Bd4 {gives drawing chances}) 30... Bxh2+ {(?)} ({
there is a win by} 30... Bb7 $1 31. a5 Bxh2+ 32. Kh1 Be5 33. Nc1 Rxf2 $1) 31.
Kh1 Qxb6 ({or} 31... Be5 32. Nc3 $1 {etc., parrying the attack (The Test of
Time)}) 32. Rc8+ Kh7 33. Kxh2 Bb7 ({not the 'Informator' move} 33... Bxg2 $2 {
in view of} 34. Qc3 $1) 34. Re8 {with equality.}) (29... Qf6 {(?)} 30. Ne2 $1 (
30. Nf3 $2 Ra1) ({or} 30. Rxe5 $2 Qxe5 31. f3 Qg5 32. g3 Qf6 $1 33. Qxe4 Qxb6 {
is bad for White - cf. variation 'c'}) 30... Ra1 31. Rc1 Qg5 32. Qf1 $1 ({not} 
32. g3 $2 Qf6 $1 {with the threats of ...Qf3 and ...Qxb6}) ({or} 32. f3 $2 Bxf3
33. g3 Ra2 {- Stohl}) 32... Rxc1 33. Nxc1 Qf4 {'with a strong attack' (The
Test of Time), but after} 34. f3 Qxh2+ 35. Kf2 Qh4+ 36. Ke2 {White holds on}) (
29... Qg5 $5 30. g3 Qf6 $1 31. Rxe5 (31. Rc4 $2 Bd5 $1 32. Rc8+ Kh7 $1 33. Bd8
Qa6 $1 {and wins}) 31... Qxe5 32. f3 Qf6 {(d6)} 33. Qxe4 Qxb6 34. Qe8+ Kg7 35.
Qe3 Kh7 $1 {, and the power of the black rook is decisive, although I would
still have had to find an accurate way to the goal}) (29... Kh7 $1 {. A quiet
move, creating the threat of ...Bxd4. Now} 30. Rb5 $2 (30. Rc1 $2 Qg5 $1) (30.
Rc4 $2 Bd5 $1) ({but also hopeless is} 30. Nf3 Bb2 $1 31. Rc7 Qe6 $1 32. Qb4
Be5 $1 {(again the back rank!)}) ({or} 30. Rxe5 Qxe5 31. h3 Rb2 32. Nf3 Qd5 $1
33. Qc3 Rxb3 34. Qf6 Qe6 $1 35. Qxe6 fxe6 36. a5 Bxf3 37. gxf3 Ra3 {, and in
the ending the rook overcomes the bishop}) {, is weak in view of} 30... Bxh2+
31. Kxh2 Qh4+ 32. Kg1 Qg4 $1 {.})) 29... Qxc5 $1 {. This position will always
shine for me with the brilliance of my first USSR champion's gold medal! ---
Times: 2.19-1.59.} (29... -- {Nikitin: 'In this titanic battle there was
significantly more psychology than chess.' Some fifteen minutes after my
unexpectedly quick win, the Psakhis-Agzamov game also concluded: in a
complicated position, where Black's extra pawn was compensated by White's
extra minutes, Lev decided not to take a risk and he agreed a draw. --- The
result was that the leaders, who had been exchanging places throughout the
tournament, crossed the finishing line together. Yudovich: 'In the final
result there is a higher competitive justice: Kasparov and Psakhis undoubtedly
deserved to win - they played best of all in the tournament. I don't recall
such a championship of the country in which both winners, I must emphasise -
both winners, finished 2½ points ahead of their nearest pursuer!'}) (29... --
{Viktor Vasiliev: 'Psakhis and Kasparov once again confirmed that in their
persons Soviet chess now has two young players of the highest class. I think
that Psakhis's rise, which has been somewhat unexpected but is now seen to be
justified, will have a favourable influence on Kasparov. As it seems to me,
Garry should now lose his feeling of exclusivity, which often hinders players
whose talent is revealed so early.' --- Psakhis: 'I can't be unhappy with a
tournament which brought a gold medal, although the first medal gave me
greater joy. In the competitive sense I played more forcefully on this
occasion, trying to exploit every chance. If Kasparov had not been in the
tournament, I would not have scored so many points. By competing, we
constantly drove each other on. Garik played very well, and he won several
brilliant games, including the one in the last round. His play at the World
Junior Championship made a great impression on me, and his success in the
championship does not surprise me.'}) (29... -- {I also paid tribute to my
opponent, and expressed my gratitude to my trainers, while about my
performance I said: 'I conducted the tournament better than I expected. In
Frunze I think that I began to approach a more harmonious way of playing than
earlier.' --- Botvinnik: 'The greatest danger for a young player is dizziness
due to success. After his unsuccessful autumn performance in Tilburg, Garry
Kasparov has begun playing more energetically, evaluating the position more
deeply. The set-back in Tilburg was very opportune for Kasparov. Ahead he has
the Interzonal Tournament...' Many experts, including Botvinnik, thought that
in this cycle three of the participants in the championship of the country -
Kasparov, Psakhis and Beliavsky - had every chance of qualifying as one of the
eight contenders for the crown.}) (29... -- {Meetings with Soviet grandmasters
were a good schooling for me. The rapid improvement in my results in the
Premier League was encouraging: from 9th place I had moved to 3rd-4th, and now
I had shared 1st-2nd. USSR champion at the age of 18 was an impressive record!
Previously the youngest champions of the country were the 20-year-old
Botvinnik (1931) and Tal (1957), and after them the 21-year-old Beliavsky 
(1974). --- In Baku my triumph caused a great stir: on 8th January 1982 my
mother and I were invited to a reception for the second time (after May 1979)
with the leader of Azerbaijan, Geidar Aliev. 'My next objective is the fight
for the title of world champion,' I said at that reception. 'And all the
tournaments in which I participate I will regard as preparation for this main
objective.'}) 0-1

[Event "?"]
[Site "?"]
[Date "????.??.??"]
[Round "?"]
[White "Dress Rehearsal"]
[Black "?"]
[Result "*"]
[Annotator "Garry Kasparov"]
[PlyCount "1"]
[EventDate "1984.??.??"]
[SourceDate "2009.12.07"]

{International Tournament in Bugojno (6-25 May 1982): 1. Kasparov - 9½ out
of 13; 2-3. Polugaevsky and Ljubojevic - 8; 4-5. Spassky and Hübner - 7½;
6-8. Andersson, Larsen and Petrosian - 7; 9. Ivanovic - 6; 10. Timman - 5½;
11-12. Kavalek and Najdorf - 5; 13. Gligoric - 4½; 14. Ivkov - 3½.} 1. --
{Many people, not only chess players, were asking: who will become the
challenger in 1984? At heart I was hoping for success, but since the time of
Tilburg I knew that I would be unable to get through the Interzonal stage
unless I gained experience of playing in top-class foreign tournaments. ---
Early in 1982 I received personal invitations from the organisers of no less
than three forthcoming and interesting super-tournaments - in London, Turin
and Bugojno. After weighing up everything for and against, my trainers and I
opted for Bugojno: in Yugoslavia I played best of all. It appeared that the
necessary permission of the Soviet Chess Federation and the Sports Committee
was no more than a formality: how could they refuse the young USSR champion?
However, Nikolai Krogius, the head of the Sports Committee Chess
Administration, offered me a run-of-the-mill category 10 tournament in
Dortmund. This was humiliating for one of the strongest five grandmasters in
the world! When I asked Krogius what was the meaning of all this, he replied
with disarming frankness: 'We have a world champion, and we don't need another
one.'} (1. -- {Nikitin: 'After Garry's victory in the championship of the
country, somewhere in the upper reaches of the Party a "directive opinion" was
formed about the need to use all available measures to keep Anatoly Karpov on
the chess throne. For this it was necessary above all to halt the rise in the
competitive achievements of Kasparov, who was considered the most realistic
contender for the crown. The strategy chosen for this was simple. From then on
Karpov and Kasparov were not to meet in the same competition, so as to rule
out a repetition of the embarrassment that occurred in the match-tournament of
USSR teams (1981), when the world champion finished behind Garry on their
individual board. In addition, in order to prevent the steady and rapid
convergence of their ratings, it was deemed advisable to lower the level of
the international tournaments to which the Soviet Chess Federation sent the
young champion of the country.' --- This plan was quite feasible, but... fate
was kind to me. In March 1982 I was invited to speak at a Congress of the
Azerbaijan Komsomol. I don't know who invited them, but Vitaly Sevastyanov,
chairman of the USSR Chess Federation, and Viktor Ivonin, deputy chairman of
the USSR Sports Committee with a special interest in chess, unexpectedly
arrived in Baku. On seeing them at the Congress, I directly appealed to them
and also to Geidar Aliev, who was present too (he knew about this burning
question from our January meeting). The result exceeded all expectations: I
was given permission to play in Bugojno!}) (1. -- {The May super-tournament of
fourteen grandmasters in Bugojno assembled an evenly-matched field and a whole
constellation of big names (but no Karpov: the two-times winner of these
tournaments preferred to play in London and Turin). I was already listed among
the favourites, along with Petrosian, Spassky and Polugayevsky, while of the
foreign participants the main contenders for first place were considered to be
Timman and Larsen, who in the past had scored many memorable tournament
victories. But there was no particular fight for the main prize: my high-tempo
start proved beyond the powers of my rivals. --- In my first round game with
Svetozar Gligoric (see the following game), the living legend of Yugoslav
chess, I played the opening experimentally and, after quickly exchanging the
queens, did not gain any real advantage. But then my opponent went wrong, and
in the end I was as though able to stalemate his pieces (see the following
game).}) *

[Event "68: Bugojno"]
[Site "?"]
[Date "1982.05.07"]
[Round "1"]
[White "Kasparov, G."]
[Black "Gligoric, S."]
[Result "1-0"]
[ECO "E12"]
[Annotator "Garry Kasparov"]
[PlyCount "83"]
[EventDate "1982.??.??"]
[Source "Everyman Chess"]
[SourceDate "2012.11.28"]

1. d4 Nf6 2. c4 e6 3. Nf3 b6 4. a3 {My favourite variation provided me with
two more wins in Bugojno - over Najdorf and Ivkov (in rounds 3 and 4), and
also a short draw with Ljubojevic just before the finish.} c5 {I did not
seriously expect this sharp continuation from Gligoric.} (4... Bb7 {was far
more often played against me (Game Nos. 43, 52, 61, 73, 75, 85, 98).}) 5. d5
Ba6 6. Qc2 exd5 7. cxd5 g6 {Black succeeds in the fianchetto of his bishop.} ({
Weaker is} 7... d6 8. Nc3 Nbd7 $6 9. Bf4 $1 {(Game No.32).}) 8. Bf4 {A
comparatively new idea, which, however, later faded into the background, since
it does not set Black any great problems.} ({The usual set-up is} 8. Nc3 Bg7 9.
g3 O-O 10. Bg2 d6 11. O-O Re8 12. Re1 {, and here} Qc7 $5 {is interesting 
(Kasparov-Fedorowicz, Graz 1981).}) (8. e4 Bxf1 9. Kxf1 d6 {has also been
tried,} ({avoiding the unclear gambit} 9... Bg7 10. e5 $5 Nxd5 11. Qe4 Nc7 12.
Bg5 Qc8 13. h4 {(Rajkovic-Gligoric, Yugoslavia 1981).})) 8... d6 9. Nc3 Bg7 10.
Qa4+ Qd7 {The natural reply.} ({The aggressive} 10... b5 $6 11. Nxb5 O-O {does
not give Black sufficient compensation for the pawn after} 12. Nc3 ({or} 12.
Rd1 {.})) 11. Bxd6 Qxa4 ({Not} 11... Nxd5 $2 {in view of} 12. Qxd7+ Kxd7 13.
Be5 $1 {.}) 12. Nxa4 Nxd5 13. O-O-O ({Before this} 13. e4 {had also occurred:}
Bxf1 14. Rxf1 Nf6 15. O-O-O Nc6 16. Nc3 O-O-O 17. Ng5 Rd7 {with equality 
(Vaganian-Tukmakov, Yerevan 1980).}) 13... Ne7 {A solid move;} ({but} 13... Nf6
14. Nc3 Nc6 {is at least no worse, since after} 15. g3 {, given by me in
'Informator', there is the strong reply} ({while} 15. e4 Bxf1 16. Rhxf1 {leads
to a position from the previous note}) 15... Ng4 $1 {.}) 14. e4 {Accepting the
exchange of the light-square bishops, but at least depriving the black knight
of the f5-square.} Bxf1 15. Rhxf1 Nbc6 16. Nc3 ({Not} 16. e5 $6 Nf5 {
(Darga-Ligterink, Graz 1979).}) 16... Rd8 $6 ({This is not yet a direct
mistake, but an inaccuracy, giving White an enduring initiative, as does} 16...
O-O-O $6 17. Bxe7 ({or} 17. Ng5 Bxc3 ({not the 'Informator' suggestion} 17...
Bh6 $2 18. f4 $1) 18. bxc3 Rdf8 {(Soln-Psakhis, Dresden Zonal 1998)} 19. f4 $5)
17... Nxe7 18. Nb5 {.}) (16... Bxc3 $1 17. bxc3 {is correct, and here Black
initially played} Rd8 {(Browne-Timman, Las Palmas Interzonal 1982)} ({he
switched to} 17... O-O {(Atalik-Fedorowicz, San Francisco 2002)}) ({or my old
recommendation} 17... f6 $5 {(M.Gurevich-Istratescu, France 2003),
endeavouring to nullify White's already modest active possibilities}) 18. Be5
$1 {(Dreev-Vallejo, Biel 2002).}) 17. Nb5 {Now Black's queenside is under
constant pressure.} Rd7 ({There is no reason to give up a pawn by} 17... Nd4 $2
18. Nfxd4 cxd4 {, since here apart from the simple} 19. Bxe7 ({there is the
strong} 19. e5 $1 f6 ({or} 19... Nf5 20. Rfe1) 20. Nxd4) 19... Kxe7 20. Nxa7 {.
}) ({After} 17... f6 {the} 18. e5 $5 {breakthrough is also unpleasant - after
the comparatively best} Kf7 19. Rfe1 {the position of the king at f7 causes
alarm.}) 18. Bf4 $1 ({After} 18. Bg3 Rxd1+ 19. Rxd1 O-O 20. Rd7 {Black could
have replied} f5 $1 21. exf5 (21. e5 $6 {is weak because of} f4 $1) 21... Nxf5
({or} 21... a6 $5 22. Na7 Rxf5 {with chances of equalising}) 22. Nxa7 Ncd4 23.
Nxd4 Nxd4 {with quite good compensation for the pawn.}) 18... Rxd1+ {An
attempt to strengthen the defence.} ({A game played a month earlier,
Ostermeyer-Karlsson (Dortmund), went} 18... Nc8 $6 19. Nc7+ Kd8 20. Rxd7+ Kxd7
21. Rd1+ Ke7 22. Nd5+ {with advantage to White.}) ({He also stands better after
} 18... Nd4 19. Be5 $1 {, for example:} Bxe5 20. Nxe5 Rd8 21. Nxd4 cxd4 22. f4
f6 23. Nf3 Nc6 24. Rf2 {etc.}) 19. Rxd1 O-O 20. Rd7 Ra8 ({Now} 20... f5 $2 {is
bad because of} 21. e5 {, when Black begins to suffocate.}) 21. Bd6 (21. Bg5 $5
f6 22. Bh4 {came into consideration. After the invasion of the white rook at
d7 I needed to find the correct way to develop my initiative, but, alas, this
part of the game, right up to the 27th move, I did not conduct very well.})
21... Nc8 22. Nc7 {The knight manoeuvre to a6 is interesting, but it needs
White to follow up with energetic and concrete action.} Rb8 23. Na6 (23. Nd5 $5
{.}) 23... Ra8 24. Bf4 (24. Bc7 $5 {with the idea of b2-b4.}) 24... N8e7 25.
Bd6 ({For the moment repeating moves, although White should have preferred the
unexpected} 25. Nb8 $1 -- (25... Kf8 26. Nxc6 Nxc6 27. Rc7) ({, or} 25... Bf8
26. Bd6 $1 -- ({, when} 26... Nxb8 $2 {is bad in view of} 27. Rd8 Kg7 28. Re8 (
{or} 28. Kc2)) ({, and therefore Black faces a difficult choice:} 26... f6 27.
Nxc6 Nxc6 28. Bxf8 Rxf8 29. Rc7 Ne5 30. Rxa7 Nd3+ 31. Kc2 Nxf2 32. Rb7 {and
Rxb6, with hopes of exploiting the speed of the outside passed a-pawn}) (26...
Rxb8 27. Bxb8 Nxb8 28. Rxa7 Nbc6 29. Rb7 Nc8 30. g3 ({or} 30. Rc7 {and the
endgame with rook and pawn against two minor pieces is also in White's favour.}
)))) 25... Nc8 26. Bg3 (26. Bc7 $5 {.}) 26... N8e7 27. Bh4 $6 ({It was not yet
too late to play} 27. Nb8 $1 {.}) 27... Bf8 $2 {Gligoric cracks under the
pressure;} ({by} 27... f6 $1 {he could have practically equalised, since if}
28. e5 {there is the excellent reply} Rd8 $1 {, when my 'Informator'
recommendation} 29. Rxd8+ Nxd8 30. exf6 Bh6+ 31. Kc2 Nf5 32. Bg5 {gives only a
draw:} Nd4+ $1 33. Nxd4 Bxg5 34. Nb5 Nc6 35. b4 cxb4 36. Nxb4 Nxb4+ 37. axb4 a5
{.}) 28. Bf6 ({Not rushing with the tempting} 28. Bxe7 Nxe7 29. Ne5 {. With a
greater number of pieces it is more difficult for Black to defend.}) 28... Rd8
29. Rc7 $1 Re8 {A passive move;} ({but} 29... Rc8 {is also cheerless - after}
30. Bxe7 ({on the other hand, the cool-headed} 30. Rb7 $5 h6 ({or} 30... Re8
31. Kc2 {retains all the advantages of his position}) 31. h4) 30... Rxc7 (30...
Nxe7 $6 31. Rxa7) 31. Bxf8 Rd7 32. Bh6 {White has two pieces for a rook, but
his knight is stuck at a6, and Black has saving chances.}) 30. g4 $5 ({Perhaps
Gligoric was hoping somehow to hold out a pawn down in the variation} 30. Bxe7
Nxe7 31. Rxa7 Nc6 32. Rb7 Rxe4 33. Rxb6 {. But White plays for a bind,
exploiting the poor placing of the black pieces, in particular the knight on
e7.}) 30... Bg7 (30... Na5 31. Ne5 $1) ({little is changed by} 30... Rc8 31.
Rb7 {.}) 31. g5 Bf8 32. Kc2 Rc8 33. Rb7 $1 ({After} 33. Bxe7 $2 Rxc7 34. Bxf8
Rd7 $1 35. Bh6 Re7 {White's two unfortunate pieces - the knight on a6 and
bishop on h6 - would have denied him any hope of success.}) 33... Nd4+ $2 {A
time-trouble check at the most inappropriate moment.} ({However, after} 33...
Re8 34. Kc3 {, with his pieces almost stalemated, Black would also have no
hope.}) 34. Nxd4 cxd4+ 35. Kd3 {Now the mopping-up begins.} Nc6 36. f4 Bd6 37.
e5 Bf8 38. b4 Nd8 39. Bxd8 Rxd8 40. Rxa7 h6 41. h4 h5 42. Nc7 (42. a4 $1 {was
more forceful, but as it was Black resigned.}) (42. -- {Then, after a short
but sharp drawn skirmish with Ivanovic, I faced over the board the famous
Argentine grandmaster Miguel Najdorf - he, like Gligoric, had played in the
epochal Candidates Tournament in 1953! --- I first saw Don Miguel at the 1980
Olympiad. Sensing a kindred chess spirit in me, he very openly and emotionally
supported me (which unnerved the Soviet sports authorities). Najdorf arrived
in Bugojno as a guest and corespondent - in general he often visited
Yugoslavia, where he had many friends and acquaintances. It suddenly
transpired that one of the invited participants had not arrived. Then Spassky
took the initiative and suggested: 'Listen, Miguel, would you like to play in
the tournament?' You should have seen how the 72-year-old Najdorf's eyes lit
up. Spassky asked the other participants whether anyone objected, but none did.
And Najdorf played in the tournament! After our game, which took place in the
3rd round, I made the following entry in my diary: 'Already at breakfast a
discussion began about the meeting of the oldest and the youngest. It is a
unique instance, when the participants are separated by 53 years!! Najdorf
kept repeating: "He is like my grandchild." He arrived for the game very
grandly dressed: in a three-piece suit and tie. Already in the opening I had
an opportunity to take my opponent by force. I sacrificed two pawns and opened
fire. In analysis it transpired that Black had a draw, but Najdorf cracked
under the pressure and quickly lost. Later he was distressed and sighed
sorrowfully: "I missed a draw, how could I?!" After the game the deputy chief
arbiter Litmanovic reprimanded me for having castled incorrectly, i.e. for
first picking up the rook and then the king, whereas the rules prescribe the
opposite course of action. I courteously agreed, but I thought to myself:
"Litmanovic is after all an old friend of Najdorf."}) (42. -- {'Before going
to sleep, already after midnight, I decided to relax a little and I opened a
volume of Esenin's poems. Suddenly the telephone rang: "Hello, this is Najdorf.
I am interested in a few variations from our game. I am writing a report for
Buenos Aires. You wouldn't like to call in on me?" I excused myself and asked
if we could discuss it on the phone. For some four minutes we discussed one
possible continuation. When Najdorf hung up, I glanced at my watch. One
o'clock in the morning! No, chess is not just a sport!' --- One day after
dinner Najdorf sat down with me and initiated the following conversation: 'Why
do you live in the USSR? Until you move away, you will never become world
champion! Go to America - you'll be a millionaire. Now Karpov does not want to
play you, but when you become an American, a Karpov-Kasparov match will take
place the very next day!' I timidly tried to object: 'But my mother?' 'What
about your mother?' cried Najdorf, gesticulating animatedly. 'You will send
her lots of money, and she will be happy. Come to Argentina, we will arrange
an enormous banquet in your honour. When Petrosian was with us, one and a half
thousand Armenians assembled in celebration. It is easy for you to travel, you
have no family. Ask Petrosian, and he will tell you that I am right. Don't
think about it, just go straight into some embassy and request political
asylum, only, of course, not in Yugoslavia!' and so on, and so forth. Najdorf
realised what Soviet power in fact amounted to. I thanked him for his advice,
but said that, unfortunately, I couldn't use it... --- In the 4th round I
defeated Ivkov and reached 3½ out of 4, but here I ran into a 'dense
atmospheric layer': ahead were three games with my formidable compatriots -
Polugayevsky, Petrosian and Spassky. It was they that decided the outcome of
the fight for first place.}) 1-0

[Event "69: Bugojno"]
[Site "?"]
[Date "1982.05.15"]
[Round "6"]
[White "Kasparov, G."]
[Black "Petrosian, T."]
[Result "1-0"]
[ECO "E11"]
[Annotator "Garry Kasparov"]
[PlyCount "47"]
[EventDate "1982.??.??"]
[Source "Everyman Chess"]
[SourceDate "2012.11.28"]

{Against Polugayevsky I gained a draw in a long forcing variation of the
King's Indian Defence (cf. Game No.28, note to Black's 12th move). And in the
crucial game with Petrosian, who had twice beaten me with Black in 1981, on
this occasion I decided to play in quiet manoeuvring style, similar to his own.
I was greatly helped by a useful piece of advice offered by Spassky the
evening before. According to him, the Achilles' heel of 'iron Tigran' was the
defence of slightly inferior positions without counterplay; moreover, the
positional vice should not be squeezed with all one's might, but cautiously,
unhurriedly, and without any abrupt movements.} 1. d4 Nf6 2. c4 e6 3. Nf3 Bb4+
({Avoiding a repetition of the discussion in the} 3... b6 4. a3 {variation 
(Game No.52).}) 4. Bd2 Qe7 5. g3 Bxd2+ 6. Qxd2 O-O 7. Bg2 d5 8. O-O dxc4 $6 {
Having decided to play as simply as possible, Petrosian follows in the
footsteps of Andersson, but this is an unfortunate exchange: White obtains a
favourable version of the Catalan.} (8... Rd8 {is more solid, as they began
playing in 1983, for example:} 9. Qc2 ({or} 9. Rc1 c6 10. Qe3 Bd7 11. Nbd2 Be8
{(an example: Kasparov-Timman, Belgrade 1989)}) 9... Nc6 (9... Na6 10. a3 $5 {
Kasparov-Ljubojevic, Tilburg 1989}) 10. cxd5 exd5 11. Nc3 Bg4 {(Timman-Korchnoi
Timman-Korchnoi, Tilburg 1986).}) 9. Na3 $1 c5 {'Dictated by the conviction
that the resulting tedious position is not to Kasparov's taste and that a draw
agreement is close' (Nikitin).} ({Before this Black held the somewhat inferior
position after} 9... Rd8 10. Nxc4 ({or} 10. Qc2 c5 11. dxc5 Qxc5 12. Rfd1 Nc6
13. Qxc4 Qxc4 14. Nxc4 {(Ivkov-Andersson, Bugojno 1982)}) 10... c5 11. Rfd1 {
(Speelman-Andersson, London 1982).}) 10. dxc5 Qxc5 11. Rac1 Nc6 12. Nxc4 {An
important moment.} Qe7 $2 {Too slow.} ({After} 12... Rd8 13. Qf4 ({in
'Informator' I suggested} 13. Qc2 Bd7 14. Qb3 {, but then} Na5 $1 {is good})
13... Bd7 14. Nfe5 {White's advantage would not have been so obvious and I
would have had to make far more creative effort.} ({Or} 14. e4) ({but not} 14.
Nd6 Qb6 $1 {.})) 13. Nfe5 $1 {Now Black's position is difficult, if not
already lost: he is quite unable to develop his queenside.} Nxe5 (13... Bd7 $6
{was worse:} 14. Nxd7 $1 Qxd7 ({or} 14... Nxd7 15. Bxc6 (15. Qd6 $5) 15... bxc6
16. Na5 c5 17. Nc6 Qe8 18. Qd6 {etc.}) 15. Qxd7 Nxd7 16. Rfd1 {and Nd6.}) 14.
Nxe5 {White's pieces are far more active, but the conversion of the advantage
is hindered by the absence of weaknesses in the opponent's position. If Black
should succeed in driving the knight from e5, White's initiative may gradually
evaporate. And Petrosian begins preparing ...f7-f6.} Nd5 (14... Rd8 15. Qa5 $1
{.}) 15. Rfd1 $1 Nb6 16. Qa5 $1 {(paralysing the queenside)} g6 ({Alas,} 16...
f6 $2 {does not work in view of} 17. Nc4 $1 Nxc4 18. Rxc4 {with a decisive
invasion of the heavy pieces (} b6 ({or} 18... Rf7 19. Be4 $5) 19. Qc3 {).
Instead of this Black plans ...Rd8, exchanging a pair of rooks.}) 17. Rd3 $1
Nd5 ({Now} 17... Rd8 $2 {also does not work because of} 18. Qc5 $1 Re8 (18...
Qxc5 $6 19. Rxd8+ Qf8 20. Rxf8+ Kxf8 21. Rc7 {with crushing threats, similar
to the finish in the game}) 19. Qxe7 Rxe7 20. Rd8+ Kg7 21. a4 $1 a5 22. Rc5 {
, and Black is lost.}) 18. e4 {It doesn't matter that the pawn blocks the
diagonal of its bishop - now it is more important to dislodge the knight from
d5.} Nb6 {The c7-square has to be covered.} (18... Nb4 $2 19. Rc7 {.}) ({Black
would also have lost after} 18... b6 $2 19. Qd2 Nb4 20. Rd6 {(d4)}) ({to say
nothing of} 18... Qb4 $2 19. Rxd5 $1 {. --- Petrosian is again hoping to play ...f7-f6.}) 19. Bf1 {A prophylactic move, of which I was very proud. 'Just a
year ago Garry would have been unable to devise such a move...' (Nikitin).} ({
I thought that the routine} 19. h4 {would allow the opponent to free himself by
} f6 20. Nc4 Nxc4 21. Rxc4 b6 22. Qc3 Ba6 {(exploiting the undefended rook on
d3)} 23. Rc7 Qxc7 24. Qxc7 Bxd3 {. In 'Informator' I assessed this position as
'unclear', but after} 25. Qd7 ({or} 25. e5 {Black loses a pawn, and with it
most probably the game.})) ({There were some more energetic alternatives:} 19.
Ng4 $5) (19. Rb3 $5 Qd6 20. Ng4) ({or} 19. Rdc3 $5 Bd7 (19... f6 $6 20. Rc7 Qd6
21. Ng4) 20. Rc7 Rfc8 21. Qd2 $1 {and wins.}) 19... Re8 $6 ({Here Black should
have given up a pawn -} 19... f6 $1 20. Nc4 Bd7 $1 21. Nxb6 axb6 22. Qxb6 Bc6 {
, although after} 23. a3 $1 {(} Bxe4 $2 24. Rc7 {) I would surely have been
able to convert my material advantage.}) 20. Rdd1 ({The number of tempting
rook moves -} 20. Rd2) (20. Rdc3) ({and} 20. Rb3 $5 {- is simply dazzling!})
20... Rf8 (20... f6 {was again bad in view of} 21. Nc4 Nxc4 (21... Bd7 $2 22.
Nd6 $1) 22. Rxc4 b6 23. Qc3 Rd8 24. Rxd8+ Qxd8 25. e5 $1 Bb7 (25... f5 26. Rd4
$1 Qe7 27. Qd2 {and wins}) 26. exf6 Rc8 27. Qe5 {when White dominates. --- Now
Black can only hope for a miracle - or the haste and inexperience of his
opponent. On the experience of our previous meetings, the latter seemed more
probable, but the lessons received from Tigran Vartanovich in Moscow and
Tilburg had taught me a great deal.}) 21. a3 $1 {The most important, according
to Spassky, was to avoid sharp advances! Insignificant moves such as this
demonstrate to the opponent just how helpless his position is.} Kg7 ({The pawn
sacrifice} 21... f6 22. Nc4 Bd7 (22... Nxc4 23. Rxc4 b6 24. Qc3 Rd8 25. Rxd8+
Qxd8 26. e5 $1 {, as in the note to Black's 20th move}) {, has become even
less attractive in view of} 23. Nxb6 axb6 24. Qxb6 Bc6 25. Bb5 $1 {.}) 22. b3 {
(with unhurried haste, I approach my goal: a3-a4 is threatened and, after the
queen moves, a4-a5)} Kg8 ({There is nothing that Black can do: now} 22... f6
23. Nc4 Bd7 {does not work because of} 24. Nxb6 axb6 25. Qb4 $1 {.}) 23. a4 {
This gradual suffocation was the most unpleasant for Petrosian.} Rd8 $6 ({
Overlooking a tactical stroke, but even without this the game would not have
lasted long, for example:} 23... Kg7 $6 24. Qc3 Kg8 25. a5) ({or} 23... f6 {-
this should have been played, although after} 24. Nc4 Nxc4 25. Rxc4 b6 26. Qc3
Rd8 27. Rc7 $1 (27. Rxd8+ $5) 27... Qxc7 28. Qxc7 Rxd1 29. Qc6 ({or} 29. Kg2 {
all the same White would have won.})) 24. Qc5 $1 ({And in view of} 24. Qc5 Qxc5
(24... Qe8 25. Ng4 $1) 25. Rxd8+ Qf8 26. Rxf8+ Kxf8 27. Rc7 {Black resigned.
--- This was a very important win for me over a difficult opponent, signifying
my emergence onto a new level. Nikitin: 'I don't remember Tigran Petrosian
losing to anyone in such style. After seeing this masterpiece of positional
skill, I realised that there was nothing more I could teach Garry about chess.
All that remained for me was to offer help in preparing for competitions and
the advice of an experienced master.' --- My black game from the 7th round
with Spassky, which ended in a draw, took an extremely tense and fighting
course. After scoring 2 out of 3 in the games with my compatriots, I retained
the lead (Kasparov - 5½ out of 7, Polugayevsky - 5), and I sensed that I
had good chances of first place. And subsequent wins in rounds 8 and 9
practically resolved this problem.}) 1-0

[Event "70: Bugojno"]
[Site "?"]
[Date "1982.05.17"]
[Round "8"]
[White "Kasparov, G."]
[Black "Larsen, B."]
[Result "1-0"]
[ECO "A55"]
[Annotator "Garry Kasparov"]
[PlyCount "77"]
[EventDate "1982.??.??"]
[Source "Everyman Chess"]
[SourceDate "2012.11.28"]

{Bent Larsen played the same line of the Old Indian Defence against me as in
the previous autumn in Tilburg (Game No.62). From the opening I gained some
advantage, but I threw it away with my nondescript 21st move.} 1. d4 Nf6 2. c4
d6 3. Nc3 e5 4. Nf3 Nbd7 5. e4 Be7 6. Be2 O-O 7. O-O c6 8. d5 Nc5 9. Qc2 cxd5
10. cxd5 Qc7 11. Nd2 Bd7 12. a4 Rac8 13. Ra3 Ne8 14. Rd1 Bg5 15. b4 Na6 16. Qb3
f5 17. Nc4 Bxc1 18. Rxc1 fxe4 19. Nxe4 Bf5 20. Ng3 Qd7 21. h3 Nf6 22. Raa1 Bg6
23. Ne3 Rxc1+ 24. Rxc1 Rc8 {In this roughly equal position I was able to find
an interesting combinative possibility.} 25. Rc6 $1 {An audacious move,
offering chances of success. The virtue of it is that it does not spoil
anything!} bxc6 $2 {After thinking for 20 out of his remaining 25 minutes,
Larsen resolutely removed the white rook from the board: he was not one of
those who took the opponent 'at his word'. But Black should have simply
ignored the impudent rook!} ({True, in the event of} 25... Bf7 $6 26. Rxc8+ ({
in 'The Test of Time' I gave} 26. Bg4 Nxg4 27. Rxc8+ Qxc8 28. hxg4 Qc1+ 29. Kh2
Qd2 $2 ({but after} 29... Bg6 {Black is alright}) 30. Qc4 $1 {and wins}) 26...
Qxc8 27. Ngf5 {White has some initiative.}) ({However,} 25... Nc7 $1 26. Rc3
Nce8 {was quite safe, improving the position of the knight and maintaining
equality. Now my idea proves justified.}) 26. dxc6+ Qf7 27. Bc4 d5 28. Nxd5 Kh8
(28... Kf8 {, with the idea of giving up the queen in a favourable version,
runs into an elegant refutation -} 29. Nb6 $1 axb6 ({or} 29... Rxc6 30. Bxf7
Bxf7 31. Qa3 $1 {with the idea of} Rxb6 32. b5+) 30. Bxf7 Bxf7 31. Qd3 {.}) 29.
Nb6 $1 Qc7 30. Nxc8 Qxc8 31. b5 $1 {Larsen underestimated this move.} ({After
the game he told me that for some reason he had only reckoned on} 31. Bxa6 $6
Qxa6 {, stopping the passed pawns (although even here after} 32. Qe6 $1 {Black
faces difficult problems). But White has no reason to exchange his strong
bishop.}) 31... Nc5 32. Qa3 (32. Qe3 $5 Qf8 33. c7 {would also have been
decisive:} Nfd7 ({or} 33... h6 34. a5) 34. Qg5 {.}) 32... Nce4 (32... Qf8 {,
attempting to keep the knight on c5, would have been parried by} 33. c7 $1 Nfd7
34. Be6 $1 {.}) 33. Qe7 Nxg3 34. c7 $1 (34. fxg3 {was also sufficient, but I
decided to play prettily.}) 34... Bf5 35. fxg3 $6 {At this point my attention
was diverted by the flag on my opponent'sclock, which was still holding up by
some kind of miracle, and suddenly I mechanically captured the black knight.} (
{There was an instant win by} 35. Qd8+ $1 Ne8 36. Bf7 ({or the more elegant} 
36. b6 $1 axb6 37. Ba6 $1 {.})) 35... h5 {Larsen promptly makes an escape
square for his king, ruling out the variations given in the previous note. But
the armada of white pawns is still irresistible.} 36. a5 e4 37. b6 axb6 38.
axb6 Kh7 (38... Qb7 {is also hopeless:} 39. Qd8+ Kh7 40. Qb8 Bc8 41. Be6 $1 {.}
) 39. Qc5 ({And as he was playing} 39. Qc5 Bd7 {Black nevertheless lost on
time. However, after} 40. Qa5 ({or} 40. Bb5 {he would have had to resign. ---
Asriyan: 'The super-tournament, which he had striven so hard to take part in,
was conducted brilliantly by Kasparov. I phoned him in Bugojno from the
editorial office after the 8th round, in which he had beaten Larsen. Garik was
in an excellent mood. He was confidently leading, and he was very happy not
only with the result, but also the quality of his games, especially singling
out his win over Petrosian. One sensed that Kasparov was in no doubt that he
would win the tournament.' --- In this positive mood I gained a spectacular
win in the next round over the highly-experienced Ljubomir Kavalek (see the
following game), a participant in several Interzonal Tournaments, two-times
champion of Czechoslovakia, and after 1968 - also of the USA!})) 1-0

[Event "71: Bugojno"]
[Site "?"]
[Date "1982.05.19"]
[Round "9"]
[White "Kavalek, L."]
[Black "Kasparov, G."]
[Result "0-1"]
[ECO "E90"]
[Annotator "Garry Kasparov"]
[PlyCount "54"]
[EventDate "1982.??.??"]
[Source "Everyman Chess"]
[SourceDate "2012.11.28"]

1. c4 g6 2. Nc3 Bg7 3. d4 Nf6 4. e4 d6 5. Nf3 (5. h3 O-O 6. Be3 {- Game No.10.}
) 5... O-O 6. h3 (6. Be2 {- Game Nos.21, 42.}) 6... e5 7. d5 {An insidious
variation, which Makogonov employed in his time.} Na6 (7... a5 {is also popular
}) ({and in former times there were heated debates over} 7... Nbd7 8. Be3 Nc5
9. Nd2 a5 10. Be2 ({or} 10. g4 $5 {(an example: Kavalek-Kestler, Bundesliga
1982)}) 10... Ne8 11. g4 f5 {(Makogonov-Boleslavsky, 15th USSR Championship,
Leningrad 1947).}) ({Another tabiya arises after} 7... Nh5 8. Nh2 {(one of the
important ideas of the variation)} Qe8 9. Be2 Nf4 10. Bf3 f5 {.} 11. -- ({.
Now sharp play results from} 11. h4 Na6 12. g3 Nc5 $5 ({Black is not satisfied
with the obvious} 12... Nh3) 13. gxf4 exf4 14. e5 $1 dxe5 15. Be2 Qe7 {
(Kavalek-Quinteros, Bauang 1973).}) ({. After 1976 they began sacrificing a
pawn -} 11. g3 {(Bagirov)} Nxh3 ({more critical than} 11... fxe4 12. Nxe4 Nh5
13. Ng4 {, Kasparov-Lanka, Leningrad 1977}) 12. Bg2 {, but after} fxe4 $1 13.
Be3 ({or} 13. Nxe4 Bf5 14. Ng4 (14. Be3 $6 Nf4 $1) 14... h5 {the complications
are probably in favour of Black}) 13... Na6 14. Nxe4 Bf5 15. f3 (15. Qd2 $2 Nf4
$1 {Andreykin-Radjabov, Moscow (blitz) 2010}) 15... h5 ({but not} 15... Nf4 $6
16. gxf4 exf4 17. Bd4 $1 {, Flear-Strikovic, Mesa 1992.}))) 8. Be3 ({Nowadays} 
8. Bg5 $5 {is in fashion (Bronstein-Kapengut, 40th USSR Championship, Baku
1972; Kavalek-R.Byrne, Chicago 1973).}) 8... Nh5 $5 ({White was ready to meet} 
8... Nc5 {with the typical} 9. Nd2 {(cf. 7...Nbd7 8 Be3 Nc5), but a surprise
awaits him: noticing the not altogether happy position of the bishop at e3 in
the lines with ...Nh5 and ...f7-f5, Black reverts to this plan.}) 9. Nh2 {
Kavalek follows the new routine;} ({whereas the old one was} 9. Nd2 Qe8 10. Nb3
(10. Be2 Nf4) 10... f5 {with double-edged play (Uhlmann-Kapengut, Berlin 1967).
}) 9... Qe8 10. Be2 Nf4 ({Possibly it would have been preferable to play} 10...
f5 11. exf5 Nf4 $1 12. Bxf4 $6 ({or} 12. O-O Bxf5 13. Re1 Qf7 $1 {with a
comfortable game (C.Hansen-Kasparov, 2nd match game, Svendborg 1990)}) 12...
exf4 13. fxg6 Qxg6 {with excellent compensation for the pawn (Chernin-J.Polgar,
New Delhi 1990).}) 11. Bf3 f5 12. h4 ({On seeing that the inclusion of the
moves ...Na6 and Be3 has made} 12. g3 $6 Nxh3 13. Bg2 $2 {unacceptable because
of} f4 {(with gain of tempo!), Kavalek 'dug up the past' - again, as he did
against Quinteros, he moved the h-pawn out of range, in order nevertheless to
play g2-g3. This is an ambitious plan, but 12 0-0 is sounder (G.Kuzmin-Gufeld,
40th USSR Championship, Baku 1972).}) 12... Qe7 ({Later Black successfully
tried both} 12... Nb4) ({and} 12... Bd7 {(my 'Informator' recommendation)} 13.
g3 Nb4 $5 ({I considered only} 13... Nh3 14. Rf1 ({and therefore} 14. h5 $1 {
is better, maintaining a shaky equality}) 14... Qe7 ({or} 14... f4 15. Bc1 Qe7
{favours Black.}))) 13. g3 {The first critical moment.} Nb4 $5 {Impressive!
The idea of leaving the knight en prise seems even more audacious than in the
aforementioned Kavalek-Quinteros game: here the c5-square is under the
observation of the bishop on e3, but there is another way that leads to d3...}
({However, today I am not sure that this is definitely the strongest move. Its
strength largely lay in its surprise value: the opponent was probably only
expecting} 13... Nh3 {.} 14. -- ({. In 'The Test of Time' I then gave} 14. Rf1
f4 15. Bc1 {, 'when there appears to be no way for Black to develop his
initiative, and his knight remains in an offside position', but after} Bd7 ({or
} 15... Nc5 {(with the idea of} 16. b4 Nd7 {) White would have faced an
unpleasant defence.})) ({. However, the active} 14. h5 $1 {would have retained
an unclear situation:} Nb4 ({or} 14... gxh5 15. Bxh5 Nb4 16. f3 f4 17. Ng4 $1)
15. hxg6 hxg6 16. a3 f4 17. Bc1 Na6 18. b4 {.})) 14. Qb3 $2 {The unexpected
knight sortie apparently dismayed Kavalek, and he immediately made a decisive
mistake.} ({He should have either moved his king, or accepted the Greek gift:} 
14. O-O {.} -- ({. After this in 'The Test of Time' I recommended} 14... g5 {
(?!) 'with good prospects for Black', and in 'Informator' I gave a variation
supposedly confirming this:} 15. gxf4 ({he also does not have full equality
after} 15. exf5 Bxf5 16. Be4 {(Stohl)} ({or} 16. Bg4)) 15... gxf4 {(?!)} (15...
exf4 {(Stohl) is better, but here too after} 16. Bd4 Bxd4 17. Qxd4 Nc2 18. Qd2
$1 Nxa1 19. hxg5 Qxg5+ 20. Kh1 Kh8 21. Rxa1 {things are not easy for Black})
16. Bc1 ({but the most accurate is} 16. Bd2 $1 Qxh4 17. exf5 Bxf5 18. Ne4 {
with an obvious advantage (Hausrath-Kaminski, Chania 1994)}) 16... Qxh4 17. Kh1
{(?!)} ({and moreover,} 17. exf5 Bxf5 18. Ne4 {gives him the better chances})
17... Rf6 18. Rg1 Rh6 19. Rg2 fxe4 20. Nxe4 Bh3 {. However, after} 21. Rg5 $1
Bf5 22. Rg2 ({or} 22. Qg1 {White is quite alright.})) ({. Therefore castling
should be answered by} 14... Nh3+ $1 15. Kg2 f4 16. Bc1 h5 17. a3 Na6 18. b4 c5
({or} 18... Bd7 {followed by ...Rf7 and ...Raf8 - here Black does indeed have
quite good prospects})) (14... Nfd3 $2 15. a3 $1 {.})) (14. gxf4 $1 {. In the
pre-computer era I did not rate the capture of the knight very highly because
of} fxe4 ({after} 14... exf4 $6 15. Bxf4 fxe4 16. Bg5 $1 {Black still has to
demonstrate that he has compensation for the piece:} Qe8 17. Be2 Nd3+ 18. Bxd3
exd3+ 19. Be3 Bxc3+ 20. bxc3 Qe4 21. Kd2 {etc.}) 15. -- {, but here too White
has good counter-chances:} (15. fxe5 exf3 ({or} 15... Nd3+ 16. Kd2 (16. Ke2 $2
Nxb2) 16... Qxe5 (16... Rxf3 17. Nxf3 Bg4 {, given by me in 'Informator', is
not to be feared in view of} 18. e6 $1 Bxf3 19. Qb3) 17. Qc2 Nxb2 18. Qxb2 exf3
19. Rae1 {with double-edged play}) 16. e6 ({Stohl's move} 16. a3 {is risky
because of} Bxe5 $1 17. axb4 Qxh4 18. Kd2 Qxc4) 16... Qxh4 17. a3 Nc6 $5 (17...
Na6 18. Qd3 $1) 18. dxc6 Bxe6 19. cxb7 Rab8 20. Qb3 {, and Black merely has
compensation for the piece (} Bxc4 21. Nf1 $1 {)}) (15. Nxe4 $1 {(this looks
somewhat safer)} exf4 16. Bd2 Nd3+ 17. Kf1 $1 ({I gave only the cooperative} 
17. Ke2 $2 Nc5 {and wins}) 17... Nxb2 (17... Bf5 18. Ng5 $1) 18. Qc2 Nxc4 19.
Re1 (19. Bc3 Bf5 {- Stohl}) (19. Qxc4 $5 Bxa1 20. Kg2) 19... Nxd2+ 20. Qxd2
Qxh4 21. Ng4 Qd8 22. Nh6+ {, and although Black now has four pawns for the
piece, his attack has petered out and White has no reason for concern.})) 14...
Nfd3+ {Such a thing is not often seen on the 14th move: the black cavalry,
after by-passing the opponent's advanced centre from the flanks, has begun to
pursue the white king.} 15. Ke2 f4 $1 16. Bd2 fxg3 $2 ({After quickly
achieving a winning position, I became confused by the mass of tempting
continuations, although the only genuinely strong one was} 16... a5 $1 {with
the idea of} 17. a3 ({or} 17. Na4 b5 $1 18. cxb5 Bd7 {with a winning attack})
17... Nc5 $1 18. Qd1 Nbd3 {.}) ({In 'Informator' and then in 'The Test of
Time' I recommended the 'resolute'} 16... Nxf2 {(?)} 17. Kxf2 Nd3+ 18. Kg2 (18.
Ke2 $2 Nc5 {etc.}) 18... fxg3 19. -- (19. Kxg3 {(?)} Rf4 $1 {, and 'the entire
black army takes part in the decisive offensive'. Indeed, here White is lost:}
20. -- (20. Ng4 Bxg4 $5 (20... h5 $5) 21. Bxg4 Qf6 $1 22. Qd1 (22. Be2 Rf8 $1)
({or} 22. Be3 Rxg4+ $1 23. Kxg4 Nf2+ $1 {and ...Rf8 is no better for White})
22... Rxg4+ $1 23. Qxg4 Qf2+ 24. Kh3 Qxd2 $1 {and wins}) (20. Nf1 Rxf3+ 21.
Kxf3 Qf8+ ({but not the earlier} 21... Qf6+ $2 22. Ke2 Nc5 {because of the
saving} 23. Bg5 $1 Bg4+ 24. Ke1 Qf3 25. Qd1 $1 Nd3+ 26. Kd2 Qg2+ ({or} 26...
Qf2+ 27. Kxd3 Qd4+ 28. Kc2 Bxd1+ 29. Rxd1 Qxc4 30. Be3) 27. Ne2 $1) 22. Ke2 Nc5
23. Qc2 Bg4+ 24. Ke1 Qf3 {and wins}) (20. Bxf4 exf4+ 21. Kg2 Qxh4 22. Rhf1 Bh3+
23. Kh1 Bxf1 24. Rxf1 Nf2+ 25. Rxf2 Qxf2 26. Qxb7 {, Black wins by} Re8 $1 ({
instead of the previously suggested} 26... Rf8 {(?), which is unclear because
of} 27. Qxc7 $1 (27. Ne2 $2 Qb6 $1) 27... Qxb2 28. Ne2 Qb8 29. Qe7) 27. Qxc7
Bd4 28. Ne2 Rxe4 $1 {.})) ({. However, if White attacks the knight on d3 -} 19.
Na4 $1 {, then after} Nf4+ ({or} 19... Nf2 20. Kxg3 Nxh1+ 21. Rxh1 Bd7 22. Qd1
Rf7 23. Nc3 Raf8 24. Bg2 {it is hard for Black to count on any advantage}) 20.
Kxg3 Bh6 21. Qc2 Bd7 22. Nc3 {.})) 17. fxg3 Rxf3 $6 {Again playing for
brilliancy.} ({And again} 17... a5 $1 {was correct, although because of the
impetuous 16...fxg3? White has acquired the important defensive resource} 18.
Be3 $1 {, for example:} Bd7 19. a3 a4 20. Qd1 Nxb2 21. Qb1 N4d3 22. Kd2 $1 c5
$1 23. Ra2 Nxc4+ 24. Kxd3 b5 {, and Black has an enduring attack, but as yet
by no means a win.}) 18. Nxf3 Bg4 19. Raf1 (19. Rhf1 $1 Rf8 20. Be3 {was more
accurate, since here if} Rf6 {(f7) there is the excellent idea} 21. Kd2 $1 Bxf3
22. a3 {, immediately solving all White's problems.}) 19... Rf8 {The
culminating moment of the game. --- At first sight, things seem brilliant for
Black: after from the direct ...Qf7 he is threatening a double exchange on f3
followed by the invasion of his queen (say, 20 a3? Rxf3! etc.). Therefore
White must urgently cover the f2-square. It gradually becomes apparent that
the threat of ...Qf7 is not deadly, if the d2-square is vacated for the king...
} 20. Nd1 $2 ({Cracking under the pressure, Kavalek overlooks the only saving
move} 20. Be3 $1 {, for example:} -- (20... Qf7 21. Kd2 $1 ({previously I
recommended} 21. a3 {(?), not noticing} Nc1+ $1 22. Bxc1 Bxf3+ 23. Ke1 Nd3+ 24.
Kd2 Nc5 25. Qa2 Qe8 {and wins}) 21... Bxf3 22. a3 Qd7 23. Rhg1 {, capturing
the knight, when Black has quite good play with a pawn for the exchange, but
not more}) (20... Bh6 21. -- (21. a3 Bxe3 ({I recommended the 'winning'} 21...
Rxf3 {(?)} 22. Rxf3 Bxf3+ 23. Kxf3 Qf6+ 24. Kg2 Bxe3 25. Rf1 {(?)} ({missing
the defence} 25. Nd1 $1) 25... Ne1+ $1) 22. Kxe3 Bxf3 23. Rhg1 Bg2 $1 24. Rxf8+
Qxf8 25. axb4 {, maintaining equality not without difficulty}) (21. Nd1 $2 Rxf3
22. Rxf3 Qf8 $1 {- Stohl}) ({, or} 21. Bxh6 $1 Rxf3 22. Rxf3 Bxf3+ 23. Kxf3
Qf6+ 24. Kg2 Qf2+ 25. Kh3 Qf3 $1 26. Kh2 $1 ({not my earlier} 26. Rh2 $2 {
because of} Nf4+ $1 27. Bxf4 exf4 28. Ne2 Nd3 $1 29. Rg2 fxg3 {and wins}) 26...
Nf2 $5 27. Rf1 $1 Ng4+ 28. Kh3 Qxf1+ 29. Kxg4 Nd3 $1 30. Qxb7 (30. Nd1 $2 Qe2+
31. Kh3 g5 $3 {and wins}) 30... Nf2+ 31. Kf3 $1 Nd1+ $1 {with perpetual check 
(a very pretty draw!).})) (20... Rf7 $5 {(perhaps the most interesting)} 21. a3
$1 ({bad is} 21. Nb1 $2 Qf8 $1 22. Nbd2 Nc1+ $1 23. Rxc1 Rxf3 {with the
murderous threat of ...Bh6!}) 21... Qf8 22. axb4 Rxf3 23. Rxf3 Nf2 $5 (23...
Qxf3+ 24. Kxd3 Qxh1 25. Qa4 $1 {is equal}) 24. Kd2 $1 {(an accurate reply,
forcing a draw)} Qxf3 25. Rh2 Nxe4+ 26. Nxe4 Qxe4 27. Qc2 $1 Qf3 28. Rf2 Qxg3
29. Qa4 $1 h5 30. Qe8+ Kh7 31. Rf7 Qh2+ 32. Bf2 Bf5 33. Rxg7+ {, and again
perpetual check.}) (20... Qd7 $2 21. a3 {. --- It may seem strange that after
20 Be3 Black does not have more, but the efficiency of his pieces is not so
great (in contrast to the position after 16...a5!).})) 20... Qf7 $1 {(now the
white knight is doomed, whereas Black's is immune: 21 Bxb4? Nc1+)} 21. Be3
Bxf3+ 22. Kd2 Qd7 23. Rhg1 ({Or} 23. Rxf3 Rxf3 24. a3 Nc5 {(Stohl)} 25. Qxb4
Qg4 {and wins.}) (23. a3 {was more resilient, but after} Bxh1 24. Rxh1 a5 $1
25. axb4 Nxb4 {the extra pawn plus the exposed position of the white king
assure Black of a win.}) 23... Qh3 24. a3 Bxe4 (24... Qh2+ $5 25. Kc3 a5 $1 {.}
) 25. Rxf8+ Bxf8 26. axb4 Qh2+ 27. Kc3 Nc1 $1 {. An elegant finish, enabling
this game to finish second in the competition for the best game in
'Informator' Volume 33. --- My lead over the second-placed Polugayevsky
reached one and a half points, and after the 10th round, in which I quickly
drew with Ljubojevic, while Polugayevsky lost to Larsen, the fate of first
place seemed to be conclusively decided: Kasparov - 8 out of 10, Polugayevsky
- 6. --- Three rounds before the finish I rather prematurely reckoned that
everything was decided, and I relaxed. My 11th round game with Jan Timman
nearly became that fly in the ointment which spoils the impression of any
success. A frivolously played King's Indian gave me an unenviable position, on
the 15th move I overlooked a veiled pawn thrust - and to avoid the worst I
gave up a whole rook (!), in order to expose the white king. On encountering
this unexpected resistance, Timman became nervous and began throwing away his
advantage. After my spectacular 27th move he went pale - one glance sufficed
for him to realise that there was no longer a win... --- The miraculous escape
in this difficult game with Timman secured me at least a share of first place,
a draw in the 12th round with Hübner put me out of reach of my rivals, and the
finishing touch was a short last-round draw with Andersson. --- This was how
this important 'defence review' concluded - a dress rehearsal before the
Interzonal Tournament starting three months later. On the whole I managed to
avoid the mistakes and the uncertainty that had pursued me in Tilburg. I did
not lose a single game and I won the tournament, finishing one and a half
points ahead of my closest pursuers. --- Botvinnik: 'Whereas previously I
thought that Kasparov might become Karpov's opponent no earlier than the next
cycle, after Bugojno I am inclined to admit that this may possibly happen
sooner.'} 0-1

[Event "?"]
[Site "?"]
[Date "????.??.??"]
[Round "?"]
[White "3: Challenger"]
[Black "?"]
[Result "*"]
[Annotator "Garry Kasparov"]
[PlyCount "1"]
[EventDate "1984.??.??"]
[SourceDate "2012.12.08"]

{Decisive Finish} 1. -- {Interzonal Tournament (Moscow, 6-25 September 1982):
1. Kasparov - 10 out of 13; 2. Beliavsky - 8½; 3-4. Tal and Andersson - 8;
5-6. Geller and G. Garcia - 7½; 7. Murey - 6½; 8-9. Sax and Christiansen
- 6; 10. Velimirovic - 5½; 11-12. van der Wiel and Gheorghiu - 5; 13.
Rodriguez - 4½; 14. Quinteros - 3.} (1. -- {In the three Interzonal
Tournaments of this cycle, which took place in Las Palmas, Toluca and Moscow,
each had two qualifying places to the Candidates matches. Twelve leading
Soviet grandmasters were admitted: Polugayevsky, Tal, Spassky, Petrosian 
(Candidates in the previous cycle), Kasparov, Beliavsky, Balashov (on rating),
Yusupov, Psakhis, Tukmakov, Geller (winners of the Zonal Tournament) and the
61-year-old Smyslov, whom the Soviet Federation gave a place from the USSR
Zone without him having to qualify. --- To us, the young players, the
last-named seemed like a kind of chess dinosaur, a piece of living history,
and in no way a real contender for the world championship. But Vasily
Vasilievich unexpectedly overturned all the forecasts and for the first time
in a decade and a half he reached the Candidates (Las Palmas 1982:1. Ribli, 2.
Smyslov). But the other Soviet participants did not finish in the first two,
either in this or the next Interzonal, held in the summer (Toluca 1982: 1-2.
Portisch and Torre). The only remaining hope was Moscow, where apart from me,
Tal, Geller and Beliavsky were playing. --- My direct preparations for the
Moscow Interzonal Tournament began soon after Bugojno. True, in June I found
time to visit Kislovodsk and play for Spartak in the USSR Team Cup (4 out of 7)
. But I spent July, as usual, on the banks of the Caspian Sea in Zagulba -
nowhere have I been able to work so well! Apart from my mother, who for many
years constantly dealt with all the organisational, and sometimes also
psychological problems, my team then comprised Nikitin, Shakarov, Vladimirov
and Timoshchenko.}) (1. -- {The mornings, naturally, were spent on the beach.
We would swim and play football - crazy beach football, unlike anything else
on earth. I did not join in straight away, but only after my daily run: three
kilometres barefoot along the seashore, on wet sand, which made running
difficult (everyone realised that without physical exercise it was not
possible to withstand the tension at the top level). After returning from the
beach I would always sleep for an hour. I would begin working with my trainers
in the afternoon, after our traditional post-lunch cup of tea. Our optimal
time, found by experience, was five hours. But if we encountered some
fascinating idea, time would naturally be forgotten... --- No less fruitful
was the second, August training session, which took place 350 km to the west
of Baku, at the stunningly beautiful Gek-Gel mountain lake.}) (1. -- {Nikitin:
'July 1982 can be regarded as the starting-point of the powerful, creative
team which worked with Kasparov for nearly four years. For six weeks the four
trainers worked with Garry, far away from crowds and various temptations. In
such a calm atmosphere we were able to do a great deal. At the end of the
session Garry played a training match with Vladimirov. The unexpected result 
(3-3) was an excellent antidote against dizziness before the start of the
competition, the outcome of which none of the experts ventured to predict. At
the Interzonal Tournament Garry was helped my me, Shakarov and Valery Chekhov.
As usual, Botvinnik restricted himself to general directives and lengthy
telephone conversations; his general instructions and advice were of great
benefit to Garry, even when he was fighting Karpov for the crown. Roughly five
years of conversations with the Teacher were effective psychotherapy for Garry,
and later they became a kind of ritual.' --- As this was the first time I had
taken part in an Interzonal Tournament, I was naturally nervous, and this told
on my play. Nevertheless the start went well. In the first round my opponent
was the experienced Hungarian grandmaster Gyula Sax (see the following game).})
*

[Event "72: Interzonal Tournament, Moscow"]
[Site "?"]
[Date "1982.09.07"]
[Round "1"]
[White "Kasparov, G."]
[Black "Sax, G."]
[Result "1-0"]
[ECO "D86"]
[Annotator "Garry Kasparov"]
[PlyCount "75"]
[EventDate "1982.??.??"]
[Source "Everyman Chess"]
[SourceDate "2012.11.28"]

1. d4 Nf6 2. c4 g6 3. Nc3 d5 4. cxd5 Nxd5 5. e4 Nxc3 6. bxc3 Bg7 7. Bc4 {(2)} (
{Earlier I had regularly employed the variation with} 7. Nf3 {(Game Nos. 38,
48), but Sax was a fervent supporter of the Grünfeld Defence, and he had a
good knowledge of its subtleties and, of course, the latest developments.
Therefore it was decided to choose not the most fashionable continuation.})
7... O-O {(8)} 8. Be3 ({Also not hurrying with the usual} 8. Ne2 {. In
preparations for the game my trainers and I noticed that in both cases Sax
replied} b6 {, and for the moment we preferred not to block the white queen's
path with the knight, in order to employ a more aggressive development set-up,
championed by the German grandmaster Rainer Knaak.}) 8... b6 {(2) In
principle a rather dubious move, which does not solve the chief strategic
objective of the opening - the undermining of White's pawn centre.} ({The
typical} 8... c5 9. Ne2 Nc6 {is better.}) 9. h4 {(2) It was because of this
attacking thrust that I first developed my bishop at e3.} ({But this plan did
not become popular, and now I regard less optimistically the idea of opening
the h-file and I am inclined towards the solid} 9. Nf3 {(Korchnoi-Gulko,
Manila Interzonal 1990).}) 9... Bb7 ({With the aim of diverting the opponent
from his home preparation, Sax avoids his move} 9... Nc6 {, which he twice
employed successfully against Knaak (Budapest 1977; Tallinn 1979). In the
second of these games after} 10. h5 $1 Na5 11. hxg6 $1 hxg6 ({it is bad to play
} 11... Nxc4 $2 12. Qh5 $1 fxg6 $2 ({or} 12... h6 13. Bxh6 fxg6 14. Qxg6 Rf7
15. Bxg7 Rxg7 16. Qc6 $1 {etc.}) 13. Qxh7+ Kf7 14. Nf3) 12. Bd3 e5 (12... c5
13. Qc1 $5) 13. Ne2 (13. Nf3 $5) 13... Re8 14. Qd2 {White retained slightly
the better chances.}) 10. Qf3 {(8)} Qd7 11. Ne2 ({Not} 11. h5 $2 {because of
the double attack} Qc6 $1 {.}) 11... h5 {(12) Forced, otherwise h4-h5, and it
is not apparent how Black can defend. But now a different question arises: how
is White going to attack?} 12. Bg5 {(12) Beginning a regrouping with the aim
of creating a powerful striking force on the kingside and landing a blow
against the black king's defences. This plan was triumphantly realised in the
well-known game Knaak-Uhlmann (Eggesin 1978), which the two players follow as
far as the 15th move.} ({But since after accurate defence White's attack would
have petered out, the simple} 12. O-O $5 {may have been better, with the
possible continuations} c5 ({or} 12... Nc6 13. Rfd1 Na5 14. Bd3 Qa4 15. Rdb1 $1
{with some claims to an advantage}) 13. Nf4 Qg4 14. Qxg4 hxg4 15. e5 {.}) 12...
Nc6 {(3)} ({Of course, not} 12... b5 $6 {(Knaak-Uhlmann, Gröditz 1975)} 13. Rb1
$1 {. Black is intending to play ...e7-e5 or ...e7-e6, maintaining the tension
and endeavouring to show that the manoeuvre Be3-g5 was pointless.}) 13. Nf4 {
(4) The time spent in thought, beginning with my 10th move (does not White
have anything better?), proved unproductive.} ({Again} 13. O-O {came into
consideration, and if} Na5 14. Bd3 {.}) 13... e6 $1 ({Of course, not} 13... Na5
$2 14. Nxg6 $1 Nxc4 15. Nxe7+ {.}) 14. Rd1 {(10)} Na5 {(6)} 15. Bd3 {A
critical moment. White is planning to advance g2-g4 or else destroy the
opponent's defences with a piece sacrifice - Nxh5 and Bf6! followed by Rh3.} (
15. Bd3 f6 $2 {does not work in view of} 16. Nxg6 fxg5 17. Qxh5 Qf7 18. f3 $1 {
with crushing threats. Looking very nervous, Sax came up with a novelty...})
15... e5 $5 {(5)} ({Uhlmann attacked the centre from the other side -} 15... c5
{, but this allowed} 16. Nxh5 $1 gxh5 17. Bf6 Bxf6 (17... e5 {is worse in view
of} 18. Rh3 Bxf6 19. Rg3+ $1 Bg7 20. Qf6 Qg4 21. Rxg4 hxg4 22. Qg5 $1) 18. Qxf6
Qd8 (18... Rfc8 $2 19. Rh3 $1 Kf8 20. Rf3 {and wins - Knaak}) 19. Qh6 -- ({,
and after} 19... f6 {(?)} 20. Qg6+ Kh8 21. e5 $1 f5 22. Qh6+ Kg8 23. Rh3 $1 Kf7
24. Rg3 {Black resigned.}) ({. Annotating the game in 'Informator' Volume 25,
Knaak considered} 19... f5 {(!)} 20. Qg6+ Kh8 21. Qxh5+ Kg8 22. exf5 {,
demonstrating a win for White after} ({and} 22. Qg6+ Kh8 23. Qh6+ Kg8 24. Rh3
f4 $1 25. Qxe6+ Rf7 {is also no better}) 22... exf5 {(?)} ({and} 22... Qe7 {(?)
} 23. f6 $1 Rxf6 24. Rh3) ({the cool-headed} 22... Qf6 $1 23. Rh3 Rf7 $1 {
extinguishes the attack:} 24. Rg3+ Rg7 25. Rxg7+ Kxg7 {etc.}) 23. Qg6+ Kh8 24.
Qh6+ Kg8 25. Bxf5 $1 {. Because of these variations, I (and, apparently, Sax)
erroneously assumed that 15...c5 'would have lost almost by force' and that
after 19 Qh6 'against the threats of e4-e5 and Rh3 there is no satisfactory
defence' (as I gave in 'The Test of Time').})) ({Thus 15...c5 would
nevertheless have led to a draw, although in a practical game it is extremely
unpleasant to come under such a powerful attack. Incidentally, I considered
Knaak's recommendation} 15... Qc6 {to be insufficient on account of} 16. Bb1 {
- for example, if} Ba6 $6 {, then} 17. Qg3 $1 {is strong, with the threats of
Nxh5, e4-e5 and Bf6. Apparently Black is already obliged to play either 15...
c5, or 15...e5.}) 16. dxe5 {(5)} Bxe5 $6 {This move suggests itself;} ({but} 
16... Rae8 $1 {is more subtle} 17. -- ({, with the idea of} 17. O-O Rxe5 {,
immediately solving all Black's problems.}) ({. If} 17. Qe2 Rxe5 18. Nxg6 fxg6
19. Bc4+ {there is an excellent queen sacrifice -} Nxc4 $1 20. Rxd7 Rxe4 21.
Rxg7+ (21. Be3 Bxc3+ 22. Kd1 Bc8 $1) 21... Kxg7 22. Be3 Rfe8) ({, while if} 17.
e6 {there is an interesting exchange sacrifice -} Bxc3+ 18. Kf1 Rxe6 19. Nxe6
Qxe6 {with good compensation for the small material deficit.})) 17. O-O Qg4 {
(13) The correct idea: finding himself under the threat of an attack, Black
switches his queen to the defence of his kingside.} (17... Qa4 $6 {is risky -
although after my 'Informator' suggestion} 18. g4 ({after} 18. Nd5 $1 {White
can develop a dangerous initiative:} Bxd5 ({or} 18... f6 19. Be3 Bxd5 20. exd5
Qxh4 21. g3 Qg4 22. Qxg4 hxg4 23. Bh6 Rfd8 24. Bxg6 Bxc3 25. Kg2 {etc.}) 19.
exd5 Qxa2 $6 20. Rfe1) 18... Nc4 $1 {(this is the reply)} 19. Qe2 (19. gxh5 Nb2
20. hxg6 fxg6) 19... Nd6 20. gxh5 Nxe4 21. Nxg6 $1 fxg6 22. Bc4+ Kh7 23. hxg6+
Kxg6 24. f4 $1 Qe8 $1 {.}) 18. Qe3 {(3)} Rfe8 {(19)} 19. Be2 {(3)} (19. f3 {
suggests itself, but after} Qg3 $1 20. Ne2 Qh2+ 21. Kf2 Bd6 {White is not able
to exploit the advanced position of the black queen.}) 19... Bxf4 {(5)} ({The
dark-square bishop has to be given up for the knight, since in the event of} 
19... Qc8 $6 20. Nd5 Bxd5 21. Rxd5 {White has the two bishops and excellent
prospects.}) 20. Bxf4 {Another critical moment.} Nc4 $2 {A fatal mistake - a
tempting combination, which to Black's misfortune meets with a far from
obvious rejoinder.} ({Intuitively I sensed that Sax would fall into this trap:
as a player with a sharp attacking style, the position with an extra pawn after
} 20... Qxh4 21. e5 Qe7 22. Qg3 Kh7 23. Rfe1 {was clearly not to his taste -
White controls the dark squares and firmly holds the initiative.}) 21. Bxc4 {
(2)} Rxe4 22. f3 $1 Qxf4 {(12)} 23. Bxf7+ $1 {Such a stroke can be overlooked;
Sax saw it, but he overlooked the following cunning move by the white queen.}
Kg7 (23... Kf8 {was completely bad:} 24. Qf2 $1 (24. Qxf4 Rxf4 25. Bxg6 {is
also possible}) 24... Re5 {(e7)} 25. Bxg6 {etc.}) 24. Qd3 $1 Qe3+ {(16) The
weakness of the g6-pawn forces Black to go into an endgame a pawn down, where
White, thanks to the activity of his pieces (his rook, dominating the 7th rank,
is especially strong), the weakness of the g6-pawn and the insecure position
of the enemy king, has every chance of winning.} 25. Qxe3 Rxe3 26. Rd7 Kh6 {(6)
} 27. Rxc7 Ba6 28. Rd1 Bd3 {(2)} ({Also after} 28... Rd3 29. Re1 $1 {there are
no particular problems with the conversion of the advantage.}) 29. Rd2 {(3)} ({
The immediately winning} 29. Kf2 $1 Re2+ 30. Kg3 Bf5 31. Rd6 {was more
forceful. But also after the solid rook move the white king is ready to enter
the battle, and its black opponent will soon imperceptibly end up in a mating
net.}) 29... Bf5 {(3)} 30. Kf2 Re5 31. Rd5 {(5)} (31. Rd6 $1 Rc5 32. Rxc5 bxc5
33. Ra6 Bd3 34. c4 {would have won more quickly.}) 31... Rxd5 {(3)} 32. Bxd5
Rd8 33. c4 {(2)} b5 {(6)} ({The bishop endgame after} 33... Rd7 34. Rxd7 Bxd7
35. Ke3 g5 36. hxg5+ Kxg5 37. g3 {etc. was also bad for Black.}) 34. Ke3 $1 {
(6)} ({Avoiding the unclear variations possible after} 34. Rxa7 Bd3 $1 {.})
34... a5 ({Again the exchange of rooks was hopeless -} 34... bxc4 35. Bxc4 Rc8
36. Rxc8 Bxc8 37. Kf4 Bd7 38. Ke5 $1 {.}) 35. Kf4 {(11)} Bb1 $6 {(3) This
loses immediately;} ({but Black would also have failed to save the game after
the more resilient} 35... bxc4 36. Bxc4 a4 ({if} 36... Rd4+ 37. Ke5 $1 Rxh4 $2
{, then} 38. f4 $1 {with the unavoidable Bg8 and Rh7 mate}) 37. Bf7 {,
gradually preparing g2-g4.}) 36. g4 $1 {The threat of mate puts an end to the
torture.} hxg4 {(4)} 37. fxg4 Rf8+ 38. Kg3 ({In view of} 38. Kg3 g5 39. cxb5 {
. Times: 1.33-2.20.}) 1-0

[Event "73: Interzonal Tournament, Moscow"]
[Site "?"]
[Date "1982.09.09"]
[Round "3"]
[White "Kasparov, G."]
[Black "Murey, J."]
[Result "1-0"]
[ECO "E12"]
[Annotator "Garry Kasparov"]
[PlyCount "51"]
[EventDate "1982.??.??"]
[Source "Everyman Chess"]
[SourceDate "2012.11.28"]

{In the 2nd round I made a draw with Black against Quinteros, and in the 3rd
round I again won with White - this time against an old acquaintance of mine,
the ex-Muscovite Jacob Murey, whom I had met back in my first master
tournament (1976). Since then he had emigrated to Israel, been one of
Korchnoi's seconds at the match in Baguio, and become an international master 
(and within a few years, also a grandmaster!).} 1. d4 Nf6 2. c4 e6 3. Nf3 b6 4.
a3 Bb7 (4... c5 {- Game Nos. 32, 68.}) 5. Nc3 d5 (5... Ne4 {- Game No.61.}) 6.
cxd5 Nxd5 7. Qc2 ({It was after my two wins in the Interzonal Tournament that
this move, instead of the usual} 7. e3 {(Game Nos. 43, 52, 85), became popular.
}) 7... c5 {(3)} (7... Nd7 $6 8. Nxd5 exd5 9. Bg5 {(Game No.98) is dubious for
Black.}) ({The best choice is} 7... Nxc3 8. bxc3 (8. Qxc3 h6 $1 {,
Polugayevsky-Sax, Biel Interzonal 1985}) 8... Be7 9. e4 O-O 10. Bd3 c5 11. O-O
Qc7 {(c8), and here, despite White's ideal pawn centre, as yet he has not
managed to devise a promising plan.} ({But topical at that time was the game
Portisch-Christiansen (London 1982), where after} 11... cxd4 {(?!)} 12. cxd4
Nc6 13. Bb2 Rc8 14. Qe2 Bf6 15. Rad1 {a tabiya of the 7 e3 variation was
reached (Game No.85, note to Black's 14th move).})) 8. e4 ({The main rejoinder
to 7...c5 has become} 8. dxc5 $1 Bxc5 9. Bg5 Qc8 10. Rc1 {, when White holds
the initiative (an example: Kasparov-van der Wiel, Amsterdam 1988).}) 8... Nxc3
9. bxc3 Nc6 ({In the 12th round Gheorghiu tried} 9... Be7 $6 {(Game No.75).}) (
{But six weeks later (Olympiad, Lucerne 1982) Sosonko surprised me with} 9...
Nd7 10. Bd3 ({the situation changed only after the game Portisch-Korchnoi 
(Montpellier Candidates 1985), where an excellent pawn sacrifice occurred:} 10.
Bf4 $1 cxd4 (10... Be7 11. d5) 11. cxd4 Rc8 12. Qb3 $1 {with the idea of} Bxe4
13. Ba6) 10... Qc7 $1 {(threatening 11...cxd4)} 11. Qd2 g6 12. O-O Bg7 {with
an excellent position for Black, and I was happy to agree a draw.}) 10. Bb2 {
(4)} ({Later, when this plan lost its successful reputation, both} 10. Be3) ({
and} 10. Bc4 {came into fashion (but Black maintained the balance without
particular effort), as well as the more interesting 10 Bd3.}) 10... Rc8 {(11)}
({In the event of} 10... cxd4 11. cxd4 Rc8 {Black also has to reckon with} 12.
Qd2 $5 Bd6 13. Bd3 O-O 14. O-O Re8 15. Rfd1 {(Sakaev-Grischuk, Moscow 2002).})
11. Rd1 ({It is rather early for} 11. d5 exd5 12. exd5 (12. Rd1 d4 $1 {,
Gelfand-Lautier, 2nd match game, Groningen 1997}) 12... Qxd5 13. Bd3 {
(Agdestein-Lau, Dortmund 1987)} Be7 {, and after} 14. O-O-O {, there is the
strong reply} ({while if} 14. O-O {- at the least} Qh5 {(defending the h-pawn)
and then 15...0-0}) 14... Nd4 $1 {.}) 11... cxd4 {(29)} 12. cxd4 a6 $2 {(10) 
It turns out that this defence against Bb5 loses an important tempo.} ({Since
the late-1980s Black began playing} 12... Bd6 $1 {(the source game:
Petursson-Lautier, Marseille 1988), completing his development and intending
by ...Qe7 to attack the a3-pawn (cf. Game No.101 in 'Revolution in the 70s').})
13. Qd2 $1 {(9) The d-pawn is preparing to march as far as d7!} ({The
immediate} 13. d5 {also looked tempting} -- ({, for example,} 13... Ne5 {(?!)}
14. Qb3 Nxf3+ 15. gxf3 exd5 {(?), recommended by me in 'The Test of Time', did
not work because of the spectacular stroke} 16. Bxa6 $1 {.}) ({. But after} 
13... Nb4 {there was a risk of selling the advantage too cheaply:} 14. Qa4+ b5
{(was this the line Murey was hoping for when he chose 12...a6?)} 15. Bxb5+
axb5 16. Qxb5+ Qd7 17. Qxd7+ Kxd7 18. dxe6+ Kxe6 {, and after} 19. Nd4+ ({or} 
19. Ng5+ Ke7 20. axb4 f6) 19... Kf6 $1 {even a pawn down Black would have
retained real drawing chances.} ({Not} 19... Ke5 $2 {when the reply} 20. O-O $1
{is very dangerous.}))) 13... Na5 {(6) Murey pins his hopes on counterplay.} (
{Of course,} 13... Ne7 {stops the immediate breakthrough in the centre, but
after} 14. Bd3 {Black faces the same problems, and his kingside makes a
pitiful impression.}) 14. d5 $1 {(4)} exd5 {(8)} ({After} 14... Nc4 15. Bxc4
Rxc4 {, apart from the simple} 16. Qe2 ({there is also a pretty combinative
solution -} 16. O-O Rxe4 17. Ng5 Rg4 18. Nxf7 $1 {, and in all variations
Black loses material.})) 15. exd5 Bd6 $2 {This involves an oversight and it
loses quickly.} ({Another counterattacking attempt} 15... Qe7+ 16. Be2 Nc4 {
would have run into} 17. d6 $3 {. After the forced} Nxd6 (17... Qxd6 18. Bxc4)
({or} 17... Nxd2 18. dxe7 Nxf3+ 19. Bxf3 {would have lost a piece}) 18. O-O Ne4
19. Qf4 {it would have been extremely difficult to defend the king caught in
the centre.}) ({More resilient was} 15... f6 16. d6 Qd7 17. Be2 {and here not}
Rc6 $2 ({but} 17... Nc4 $1 18. Bxc4 Rxc4 {, hoping to play the king to f7 or
d8, using the d6-pawn as a screen and on no account aiming to win it quickly,
although after} 19. O-O {Black's position is unenviable}) 18. Qe3+ Kf7 (18...
Kd8 {is even worse because of the same reply} 19. Ne5 $1 fxe5 20. Qg5+) 19.
Ne5+ $3 fxe5 20. Qf3+ Kg8 (20... Ke8 21. Qh5+ Kd8 22. Qg5+ {etc.}) 21. Qd5+ Qf7
22. d7 Re6 23. Qxe6 Qxe6 24. d8=Q {and wins.}) 16. Bxg7 {(4)} Qe7+ 17. Be2 Rg8
18. Qh6 $1 f5 {(5)} ({It is all over: if} 18... Rc2 {there is} 19. Nd4 {.}) 19.
Bf6 {(2)} Qf8 {(5)} ({The exchange sacrifice} 19... Rg6 {would have been most
simply parried by} 20. Qxg6+ hxg6 21. Bxe7 Kxe7 22. h4 $5 Bxa3 23. h5 {.}) 20.
Qxh7 {(2)} Qf7 {(11)} ({If} 20... Rxg2 {, then} 21. Ne5 $1 {is quickly
decisive.}) 21. Qxf5 Rg6 {(2)} 22. Qe4+ {(3)} Kf8 23. Ng5 Rxg5 {(2)} 24. Bxg5
Re8 25. Bh6+ Kg8 26. Qg4+ {. Times: 0.43-1.43. --- In the 4th round I gained
a difficult draw in a Sicilian with Geller. Then I had two Whites in a row
against two other very dangerous rivals - Tal and Beliavsky. This was the
first key moment of the tournament race. --- Against Tal, who was half a point
ahead of me (3½ out of 4!), I employed the then rare 'Anti-Moscow Gambit' -
an audacious set-up, with a novelty which took him by surprise. Up to the 17th
move it all went well for me. All I had to do was land a combinative blow,
giving White a fearfully strong attack, but I was tempted by another, showy
continuation - and I ended up on the verge of disaster. Fortunately, Tal, with
a piece for a pawn, accepted my offer of a draw (cf. Game No.82, note to
Black's 5th move). Even so I felt shocked, since I had gone wrong in tactical
complications, which I regarded as my natural element! I tried to forget this
game, and to distract myself somehow. But I couldn't rid myself of the thought:
'How could I so miscalculate?!' I had the anxious feeling that I could make
another mistake. And the next day, unsettled by an unexpected move from
Beliavsky, after an hour's thought I blundered a pawn, and then sacrificed the
wrong knight! However, after a sharp battle this nervy encounter also ended in
a draw. --- Shortly before the half-way distance the leading group looked like
this: Guillermo Garcia - 5½ out of 6 (one of the Moscow sensations, who
frayed the nerves of the favourites); Tal and Andersson - 4½; Kasparov - 4;
Beliavsky - 3½; Geller - 3. Over the next few days those last three
launched a desperate pursuit.} 1-0

[Event "74: Interzonal Tournament, Moscow"]
[Site "?"]
[Date "1982.09.16"]
[Round "7"]
[White "Christiansen, L."]
[Black "Kasparov, G."]
[Result "0-1"]
[ECO "E76"]
[Annotator "Garry Kasparov"]
[PlyCount "80"]
[EventDate "1982.??.??"]
[Source "Everyman Chess"]
[SourceDate "2012.11.28"]

1. d4 Nf6 2. c4 g6 3. Nc3 Bg7 4. e4 d6 5. f4 O-O {(4)} 6. Nf3 {The choice of
variation was evidence of my opponent's aggressive intentions. Well, that
evening I was also in a fighting mood.} c5 {(3)} 7. d5 e6 {(3)} 8. dxe6 {A
rather rare set-up (in contrast to 8 Be2 - Game No.53). In exchanging his
strong d5-pawn, White hopes to exploit his superior control over the central
squares and the activity of his e4- and f4-pawn pair.} fxe6 {(7)} ({The natural
} 8... Bxe6 {gives White an easier game after} 9. Bd3 {and f4-f5 
(Murey-Kasparov, Baku 1976). Therefore I chose a dynamic and little-studied
continuation.}) 9. Bd3 Nc6 10. O-O Nd4 $1 {(3) Black immediately exploits the
main advantage of his position - his control of d4.} 11. Ng5 $6 {(10) An
artificial manoeuvre, allowing Black to seize the initiative.} ({White could
also not have been satisfied with} 11. Nxd4 cxd4 12. Ne2 e5) ({or} 11. Ne2
Nxf3+ 12. Rxf3 e5 $5 (12... Bd7 {is also good.})) ({The prophylactic} 11. Kh1)
({or the developing} 11. Bd2 {(Vaganian-Torre, Buenos Aires 1978) was
comparatively better.}) 11... e5 $1 {(19)} ({More active than} 11... Qe7 {with
the same idea of ...e6-e5 (S.Garcia-Tatai, Bucharest 1971).}) ({There was no
point in Black weakening his kingside -} 11... h6 $6 12. Nf3 $1 {.}) 12. f5 {
(5) 'Consistent;} ({but} 12. fxe5 {would have been more cautious', I stated
in 'The Test of Time'} -- ({, while in 'Informator' I gave} 12... dxe5 13. Nd5
{with equality. Indeed, after} Qd6 14. Qe1 Bd7 {the game is roughly equal.}) ({
. However, it is more accurate to interpose} 12... Bg4 $1 {, and after} 13. Qe1
(13. Nf3 $2 Nh5 $1) 13... Nd7 $5 (13... dxe5 {is also not bad - now} 14. Nd5 $2
{is weak because of} h6 $1) 14. exd6 Ne5 {Black's unexpected activity more
than compensates for the sacrificed pawn.})) 12... h6 {(4)} 13. Nh3 {(21) Yes,
Christiansen had plenty to think about.} ({After the inglorious return of the
knight to its former post -} 13. Nf3 {Black would have played} gxf5 14. exf5
Nxf5 {, winning a pawn:} 15. Nxe5 {(?)} dxe5 16. Bxf5 {is bad because of} Qd4+
$1 17. Qxd4 (17. Kh1 $2 Bxf5 18. Rxf5 Ng4 $1) 17... cxd4 18. Nb5 Bxf5 19. Rxf5
Ne8 {, when the pair of connected passed pawns in the centre wins for Black.
However, perhaps it is worth seeking compensation for the pawn after 15 Qe1!?.}
) ({In later games the knight sacrifice} 13. fxg6 hxg5 14. Bxg5 {occurred, but
here my 'Informator' recommendation} Be6 $1 {proved good} 15. -- ({, with the
idea of} 15. h4 Qd7 $1) (15. Nd5 Bxd5 16. exd5 Qd7 ({my suggestion} 16... e4 {
(?!)} 17. Bxe4 Qe7 18. Bd3 Rae8 {is, however, unclear in view of} 19. Bf4 $1))
({, or} 15. Bxf6 Bxf6 16. Qh5 Qe7 17. Nd5 Bxd5 18. exd5 Qg7 $1 {. To all
appearances, White does not have full compensation for the piece.})) 13... gxf5
{(3)} 14. exf5 b5 $6 {A rare flank blow with the aim of gaining predominance
in the centre. It later transpired that this was a novelty.} ({But} 14... Qe8
$1 {was objectively stronger, and if} 15. g4 ({while after} 15. Nf2 Bxf5 16.
Bxf5 Nxf5 {Black is simply a pawn up (} 17. Nfe4 Qe6 $1 {)}) {, 
(Niklasson-Boersma, Ramsgate 1979) there is the unpleasant} 15... e4 $1 {.})
15. Be3 $2 {(6)} ({It is not possible to reinforce the c4-pawn -} 15. b3 $2 {
(Hausner-Zsu.Polgar, Kecskemet 1983)} b4 $1 {, and the knight has no normal
square to move to:} 16. Ne2 ({or} 16. Ne4 Bxf5 17. Nxf6+ Qxf6 $1 18. Bxf5 Nxf5
{winning a pawn (} 19. Qd5+ Kh7 $1 {, Glek-Barash, 17th USSR Correspondence
Championship 1986)}) 16... e4 17. Bc2 d5 {.}) ({But the pawn sacrifice should
have been accepted -} 15. Nxb5 $1 {, maintaining approximate equality:} e4 ({or
} 15... Nxb5 16. cxb5 d5 17. Be2 {, and although the powerful pawn centre
gives Black good compensation for the pawn, the position is completely unclear}
) 16. Be2 (16. Bb1 $5) 16... Nxf5 17. Nf4 {, and the 'bad' knight comes into
play.}) (15. cxb5 $6 d5 {is worse for White. --- But Christiansen, like Sax,
was a player with a dynamic style, and he did not like to concede the
initiative. Therefore he did not take the pawn, but tried to solve his
problems by tactical means.}) 15... bxc4 {(6)} 16. Bxc4+ Kh8 $1 {(9)} ({
Avoiding a transparent trap -} 16... d5 $2 17. Nxd5 $1 Nxd5 18. Bxd4 cxd4 19.
Qb3 {, and threatening both ...d6-d5 and ...Nxf5.}) 17. Bxd4 $6 {(11)} (17. Bd3
Rb8 $1 18. Rb1 d5) ({or} 17. Be6 Nxe6 18. fxe6 Rb8 $1 19. b3 Bxe6 {was also
unattractive, but now the power of Black's central pawns greatly increases.})
17... cxd4 {(2)} 18. Nd5 Ba6 $5 {(15) Black sacrifices the advantage of the
two bishops to enable his knight to occupy a dominating post at e3.} ({But it
would appear that} 18... Rb8 $1 {was even stronger, for example:} 19. b3 ({or} 
19. Nxf6 Rxf6 20. Qh5 (20. b3 d5) ({or} 20. g4 Rf8 {is also bad for White})
20... Rxb2 21. Rae1 Qc7 22. Bd3 Qf7 {and wins}) 19... Nxd5 20. Bxd5 Bxf5 21.
Qh5 Bh7 $1 22. Rxf8+ Qxf8 23. Rf1 Qc8 $1 24. Nf2 Qc2 $1 {.}) 19. Nxf6 $6 {(24)
In a search for tactical counter-chances Christiansen sacrifices the exchange;}
({not wishing to conduct a difficult defence after} 19. Bxa6 Nxd5 20. Qh5 Ne3
21. Rf2 d5 {.}) 19... Bxc4 20. Nh5 Bxf1 {(16)} 21. Qg4 Qd7 22. Rxf1 {It may
seem that White's threats on the kingside are dangerous, but if Black plays
accurately he has no reason for concern.} d3 $6 {The illusion of a quick win!}
({The goal would have been achieved without particular problems after both} 
22... Rf7 23. b3 Raf8 24. Qg6 (24. Ng3 d5) 24... Rg8 $1 25. Ng3 Bf8 26. Qh5 d5)
({and} 22... Rac8 23. Nf2 Rc7 24. Nd3 Bf6 {with the intention of ...Bg5.}) 23.
Qf3 $6 {(11)} ({Both players underestimated the defence} 23. Nf2 $1 d2 24. Ne4
Rxf5 25. Rxf5 d1=Q+ 26. Qxd1 Qxf5 27. Nxd6 Qg6 28. Nxg7 Kxg7 29. h3 {with
hopes of saving the game. Christiansen will not have a second chance.}) (23.
Qe4 $2 d2 $1 {.}) 23... d2 $1 {(2)} 24. g4 {(22)} ({The mercurial d-pawn
denies White the possibility of playing actively:} 24. f6 $2 Bxf6 $1 25. Nxf6
Qe6 {, regaining the pinned knight.}) 24... Rac8 $1 {(4)} 25. Qd3 {(3)} ({
White would like to bring the knight into play as soon as possible -} 25. Nf2 {
, but here too after} Rc2 {there is no way of saving the game.}) 25... Qa4 {(7)
} 26. Nf2 Qd4 $5 ({Not the only way to win (} 26... Qb4 $1 {was also strong),
but a sensible one from the practical point of view: with the exchange of
queens White's chances of exploiting the insecure position of the black king
disappear.}) 27. Qxd4 exd4 {Outwardly the tripled pawns make a pitiful sight,
but here the strength of the pawns is determined by their degree of
advancement. The main role continues to be played by the d2-pawn.} 28. Nf4 {(2)
} Rfe8 $1 {(3)} 29. Ne6 {Blocking the entry of at least one of the rooks.} Rc1
({The immediate} 29... Bf6 $1 30. Nd1 Bh4 $1 {would have been more quickly
decisive, with the idea of} 31. Kg2 Rc1 32. Kf3 $6 Be1 33. Ke2 d3+ $1 {.}) 30.
Nd1 {(3)} Bf6 (30... d3) ({or first} 30... Rb8 {was also tempting.}) 31. Kf2
Bg5 {(22)} ({It was now too late for} 31... Bh4+ $6 32. Ke2 Be1 {in view of}
33. Rf3 $1 {, when the d-pawn is halted and the black bishop is out of play.})
({But} 31... Rb8 {was good, with the pretty variation} 32. Ke2 Rxb2 $1 33. Nxb2
d3+ $1 {.}) 32. Ke2 Rc5 ({The alternative to this regrouping was} 32... Kg8 $5
33. Kd3 ({or} 33. h4 Bxh4 34. Kxd2 Rec8) 33... Ra1 {.}) 33. Kd3 {(5)} ({If} 33.
h4 {, then} Re5+ 34. Kd3 Re1 35. Rf3 Bxh4 36. Kxd2 Rg1 {and wins.}) 33... Re5
34. Nxg5 {(2)} hxg5 $1 ({More correct than the showy} 34... Re1 35. Rf2 (35.
Nf7+ Kg8 36. Rf2 Kxf7 ({after} 36... Rxd1 $2 37. Nxd6 {White is out of danger})
37. Rxd2 R8e4) 35... hxg5 36. Rxd2 R8e4 {.}) 35. Rf2 ({After} 35. Kxd2 {the
crude} Re2+ ({but the black rook could also have performed a 'staircase' -} 
35... Re4 $5 36. h3 Rf4 {, and White is essentially stalemated:} 37. Rh1 ({or} 
37. Rg1 Rf3 $1) 37... Kg7) 36. Kd3 Rxh2 {would have been decisive.}) 35... Re4
36. h3 $6 {(3) Allowing a little combination.} ({The resistance would not
have been prolonged for long by} 36. Rg2 Kg7 37. Kxd2 Re1 38. h3 d5 39. Rh2 Rg1
{and wins.}) 36... Re3+ $1 {(2)} 37. Kxd4 {(4)} ({Of course, not} 37. Nxe3 $2
dxe3) ({while if} 37. Kxd2 {, then simply} Rxh3 {. But now comes the finest
hour of the d2-pawn, which appeared to be doomed after the impulsive advance
on the 22nd move.}) 37... R8e4+ $1 38. Kd5 Re2 39. Rf3 {(3)} Re1 40. f6 ({Or} 
40. Rd3 Rxd1 41. Kxe4 Re1+ {.}) 40... Rf4 {. Here Christiansen took the
envelope to adjourn the game, but after 12 minutes' thought he stopped the
clocks and offered me his hand. --- Times: 2.40-2.25.} (40... -- {No less
important were the wins by Beliavsky over Tal (the Lvov grandmaster was
playing very strongly!) and Andersson over Murey. The position of the leaders 
(Garcia - 6 out of 7; Andersson - 5½; Kasparov - 5; Beliavsky and Tal - 4½) pointed to the prospect of a gripping finish. --- In the 8th round I had
White against the unexpected leader at the start - the 28-year-old Cuban
grandmaster Guillermo Garcia. A win in this game could have sharply improved
my chances of overall success, but, alas, things did not work out. I decided
not to try and swim against the tide and on the 24th move, after exhausting
all the fighting resources, I offered a draw. I remember the apt comment made
in passing by Geller: 'It is very hard to win against any grandmaster who is
on a surge.' --- That same day Tal crushed Velimirovic in spectacular style,
Beliavsky won against Christiansen, and Geller, who was beginning his
finishing spurt, inflicted the first and only defeat on Andersson. The battle
for the two places under the sun intensified in the extreme: Garcia - 6½
out of 8; Kasparov, Beliavsky, Tal and Andersson - 5½; Geller - 4½.}) (
40... -- {Another key moment in the tournament came in the 9th round.
Beliavsky accomplished a genuine competitive feat - he defeated Garcia with
Black, making it a hat-trick of wins! Geller also won and continued his
pursuit of the leaders, since Tal had to be satisfied with a draw as Black
against Christiansen, as did I against Andersson. --- That day I made a
mistake at the very start of the game, by choosing an incorrect objective: I
was unnerved by the fact that I couldn't get into the lead, and I tried to
play for a win with Black (although, taking account of my comparatively easy
finish, a quiet draw would have been far more sensible!). And in the Classical
Variation of the King's Indian, instead of the customary 6...e5 (7 0-0 Nc6 -
Game No.21), fearing Andersson's favourite exchange 7 dxe5 with the transition
into an endgame, I chose 6...Nbd7 7 0-0 e5, which was alien to me. In this
unfamiliar situation I played extremely uncertainly, then I suddenly launched
a reckless counterattack and lost a pawn. Soon Andersson won a second pawn,
and I ended up in a desperate position. But here my self-preservation instinct
operated: instead of nervously pacing around the stage, I sat at the board
with an imperturbable expression. Not long before, in Bugojno, self-control
had rescued me in my game with Timman, when I gave up a rook. Something
similar occurred on this occasion. In a time scramble, which was more serious
for my opponent, I abruptly played 28...d3!. Ulf put his head in his hands and
sank into thought. The tension became unbearable! Sensing that my opponent
could not see a decisive continuation and was rattled, I offered a draw (a
small violation of the rules: a draw should be offered immediately after
making a move). Beliavsky later said: 'I am sure that, if the game had
continued, its outcome would have been far from clear.' The flag on White's
clock rose inexorably, and after a minute's hesitation Andersson accepted the
draw offer. --- This miraculous save gave me a great charge of positive
emotions and helped me to escape from the crisis, although not immediately.
After nine rounds the situation remained confused: Beliavsky and Garcia - 6½; Kasparov, Tal and Andersson - 6; Geller - 5½.}) (40... -- {Asriyan:
'Garik's tournament position was not very secure. He was obviously nervous,
and he almost lost to Tal and Andersson. At just that time I interviewed
Petrosian, and, despite his liking for Garik, he remarked that up till then
Kasparov had been very lucky. Of course, he particularly had in mind the games
with Tal and Andersson... But at the finish Kasparov developed a furious pace,
and it was no longer possible to stop him.' --- In the 10th round Tal and
Geller drew their games, Garcia continued his decline by losing to
Christiansen, while the Beliavsky-Andersson game was adjourned in a better
endgame for Black. I had White against the Filipino master Ruben Rodriguez,
who was 260 rating points lower than me. After encountering the Cambridge
Springs Defence (cf. Game No.90, note to White's 7th move), I gained only a
slightly better endgame and in the fifth hour of play I became angry: my
opponent was obviously in no hurry to lose! Even so, with his 40th move, the
last before the time control, he moved his king to the wrong square and lost a
pawn. Here the game was adjourned, and now everything depended on the secret
move, sealed by Rodriguez: in the best case for him Black would have retained
real drawing chances... But since the game was due to be resumed only after
the 12th round, at first more urgent problems had to be solved. --- From this
point I stopped feeling nervous - and my form returned! In the 11th round I
easily crushed van der Wiel in 22 moves, Beliavsky adjourned in a winning
position against Rodriguez, while the remaining rivals advanced by only half a
point.}) 0-1

[Event "75: Interzonal Tournament, Moscow"]
[Site "?"]
[Date "1982.09.22"]
[Round "12"]
[White "Kasparov, G."]
[Black "Gheorghiu, F."]
[Result "1-0"]
[ECO "E12"]
[Annotator "Garry Kasparov"]
[PlyCount "53"]
[EventDate "1982.??.??"]
[Source "Everyman Chess"]
[SourceDate "2012.11.28"]

{For my game in the penultimate, 12th round with the highly experienced
Romanian grandmaster Florian Gheorghiu (once also a world junior champion!), I
arrived in an up-beat, fighting mood, realising perfectly well that a win
would practically guarantee me one of the cherished top two places.} 1. d4 Nf6
2. c4 e6 3. Nf3 b6 4. a3 {(2) Gheorghiu himself like employing this variation
with White, and now he tried defending it with Black.} Bb7 (4... c5 {- Game
Nos. 32, 68.}) 5. Nc3 d5 (5... Ne4 {- Game No.61.}) 6. cxd5 Nxd5 7. Qc2 (7. e3
{- Game Nos. 43, 52, 85.}) 7... c5 {(8)} ({As has already been said, the
quality of this move is somewhere in between} 7... Nd7 $6 {(Game No.98)}) ({and
} 7... Nxc3 $1 {.}) 8. e4 {(11)} Nxc3 9. bxc3 {After my win in the 3rd round
over Murey it seemed incredible that any of the tournament participants would
repeat this variation. Nevertheless, closer to the finish a twin game was
played, similar to the prototype not only in content, but also in length. With
mounting interest I followed my opponent's opening moves - what had he
prepared?} Be7 $6 {It is better to play 7...Be7 with the pawn on c7 (even
allowing 8 Nxd5 or 8 Bd2).} ({But here Black should play either 'à la Murey' -
} 9... Nc6 {(Game No.73)}) ({or 'à la Sosonko' -} 9... Nd7 {.}) 10. Bb5+ $1 {
(4) A strong reply, disclosing the drawback to Black's rather strange move.
However, as we will see, the fears regarding his position were slightly
exaggerated.} Bc6 {(10) The position of the bishop on c6 will provide the
motif for various combinations;} ({but} 10... Nc6 $2 {would have lost a pawn:}
11. Ne5 Qc7 12. Qa4 Rc8 13. Qxa7 {.}) 11. Bd3 $1 Nd7 {(8)} 12. O-O {(2)} h6 $6
{(22) A non-forced loss of a tempo.} ({After} 12... Bb7 $6 {there is the
unpleasant} 13. d5 $1 exd5 14. exd5 Bxd5 15. Rd1) ({and if} 12... O-O {
Gheorghiu was afraid of} 13. d5 {, but practice has shown that after} exd5 14.
exd5 Bxd5 15. Bxh7+ Kh8 16. Be4 Bxe4 17. Qxe4 Bf6 ({or} 17... Nf6 {White's
achievements are slight, and therefore he has looked for an advantage by 13
Rd1, 13 Qe2 or 13 Bf4.})) (12... Qc7 {(preventing Bf4) is also interesting:}
13. -- (13. Qe2 O-O 14. d5 Bb7 $1 {(Papin-Motylev, Moscow 2008)}) ({, or} 13.
Re1 $5 {intensifying the threat of d4-d5;} Bb7 14. d5 $1 ({the more modest} 14.
Qe2 O-O {is equal, P.Cramling-Spassky, Copenhagen 1997}) 14... exd5 $2 ({while
after} 14... c4 15. Bf1 {he retains some initiative (Borne-De Sousa, Bagneux
1993)}) 15. exd5 Bxd5 16. Qe2 Be6 17. Qe4 {allows White a powerful attack.}) ({
. If} 13. Rd1 Rd8 $1 {.})) ({It is amusing that in the event of} 12... cxd4 13.
cxd4 Rc8 14. Qe2 Bb7 15. Bb2 ({but} 15. a4 $1 {is more energetic. In general,
as is readily apparent, nothing catastrophic for Black has yet occurred}) 15...
O-O {a position from my game with Akesson (Game No.43) could have arisen.}) 13.
Rd1 {(41)} (13. Qe2 O-O 14. Bf4 ({or the immediate} 14. e5 {was steadier,
exploiting the unfortunate move ...h7-h6. But I very much wanted to break
through in the centre!})) ({The immediate} 13. d5 $5 exd5 14. exd5 Bxd5 15. Rd1
{looked very tempting} -- ({, when} 15... Bc6 16. Bf4) ({, or} 15... Qc7 16.
Bb5 Bc6 17. Bf4 $1 {is advantageous to White}) ({, as is} 15... Bxf3 16. gxf3
a6 {(recommended by Stohl)} 17. Qa4 $1 {.}) ({. However,} 15... Be6 {seemed
unclear to me in view of the exchange sacrifice after} 16. Be4 ({I rejected
the variation} 16. Bf5 $5 Bxf5 17. Qxf5 {because of} Qc8 $1 {, although} 18.
Qg4 $1 {would have given White a strong initiative for the pawn}) ({or} 16. Bf4
O-O 17. Bh7+ Kh8 18. Be4) 16... Rc8 17. Bf4 O-O 18. Ne5 ({somewhat better than
} 18. Bb7) 18... Bf6 19. Nc6 Rxc6 20. Bxc6 Qc8 21. Bd5 {.})) 13... Qc7 $2 {(7)
The culmination of the game. Gheorghiu does not sense the imminent danger!} ({
Black's position is also very dismal after} 13... O-O $6 14. d5 exd5 15. exd5
Bb7 16. c4 {.}) ({However, he should have preferred} 13... cxd4 $1 {. In
'Informator' and then in 'The Test of Time' I parried this with the
'unexpected'} 14. Nxd4 ({after the normal} 14. cxd4 Rc8 15. Qe2 Ba4 16. Re1 O-O
17. Bf4 {White's chances are slightly better, but there is still all to play
for. Now, however, my plan fully justifies itself}) 14... Qc7 15. Nxc6 Qxc6 16.
Qe2 $1 {with the threat of Bb5, and 'the pin on the a4-e8 diagonal may prove
fatal'. Thus} Qc7 17. Bb5 O-O-O {(?!)} ({but after the cool-headed} 17... Rd8
$1 {the pin does not give anything:} 18. Qg4 ({or} 18. Qd3 a6 $1 19. Bxa6 ({or
} 19. Bf4 Qxf4 20. Bxd7+ Kf8 21. Qxa6 Qc7 {with good compensation for the pawn}
) 19... O-O) 18... Qxc3 $1 19. Be3 O-O $1 20. Bd4 Nf6 {with equality}) 18. a4 {
(Stohl)} ({or} 18. Be3 {is to White's advantage.})) 14. d5 $1 {(7) Here, in
view of White's lead in development, this typical pawn breakthrough in the
centre is especially effective.} exd5 {(3)} 15. exd5 Bxd5 16. Bb5 a6 $2 {(7) 
Already the decisive mistake.} (16... Be6 $2 {was also bad:} 17. Qe4 $1 Rd8 18.
Bf4 Qc8 19. Ne5 {, since if} O-O {White wins by} 20. Nxd7 Bxd7 21. Bd3 $1 {
(Stohl).}) ({The only chance was} 16... Bc6 {, although after} 17. Bf4 $1 {
White would have retained an obvious advantage:} -- (17... Qxf4 18. Bxc6 O-O-O
19. a4 $1 {with a powerful attack}) ({, or} 17... Qb7 18. Bxc6 Qxc6 19. Re1 $1
Kf8 (19... Nf8 $2 20. Ne5 Qb7 21. Qf5 $1) 20. Rad1 Re8 {, and my earlier
continuation} 21. Qf5 {(?)} ({but after} 21. Qe2 $1 {Black would have faced a
difficult defence. Although nominally he is a pawn up, he is effectively
playing a whole rook down:} Nf6 $6 ({or} 21... Qc8 $6 22. Qd3 $1 Nf6 23. Rxe7
$1 Rxe7 24. Bd6 {(Crouch) is bad for Black}) ({and} 21... g5 {is insufficient
in view of} 22. Bd6 Bxd6 23. Qxe8+ Kg7 24. Qe2 {(e4)}) (21... g6 22. Qa6 $1)
22. Qc4 $1 {(with the threats of Ne5 and Qxf7+!)}) 21... Nf6 22. Ne5 Qc8 {(?)}
23. Nd7+ $1 {is unclear because of 22...Qa4! (Crouch). --- Apparently in these
variations Gheorghiu was concerned about his restless king, but now Black goes
from the frying pan into the fire...})) 17. Bf4 $1 {This forces the opponent
to throw caution to the winds and bring his king into the centre of the board.}
(17. Bxd7+ $2 Qxd7 18. c4 $2 Be4 $1 {would have been too naïve.}) 17... Qxf4 {
(13)} (17... Qb7 {was also hopeless:} 18. Bxd7+ Qxd7 19. c4 Qg4 20. Rxd5 Qxf4
21. Re1 Ra7 (21... Qf6 22. Ne5 $1 {with the threat of Nd7}) 22. Ne5 {
(threatening Nc6)} O-O ({if} 22... Rc7 $2 {the simplest is} 23. Qa4+ $1 ({
although the old line} 23. Ng6 $5 fxg6 24. Qxg6+ Qf7 25. Rd8+ $1 {will also do}
) 23... b5 24. Qa5 Rc8 25. Nd7 {(c6)}) 23. g3 Qf6 24. Nd7 Rxd7 25. Rxd7 Bd6 26.
Qe4 {with unbearable pressure.}) 18. Bxd7+ Kxd7 19. Rxd5+ Kc7 ({Earlier I
thought that} 19... Kc8 {with the idea of ...Ra7-c7 would have made it hard
for White to convert his advantage, but the resolute} 20. Rf5 Qc4 21. Re1 $1
Bf6 ({or} 21... Ra7 22. Re4 $1 Qb5 23. Rxf7 {would have dispelled this illusion
}) (21... Bd6) 22. Rxf6 $1 gxf6 23. Qf5+ Kb8 24. Qxf6 {(Stohl).}) 20. Re1 $1 {
(2)} Bd6 {(12)} ({After} 20... Bf6 21. Re4 {the queen is trapped}) ({while if} 
20... Rhe8 {not only} 21. Rde5 {is strong,} ({but also} 21. Rf5 Qd6 22. Rxf7 {.
})) 21. Rf5 Qc4 22. Re4 ({Even in such a position it is not too late to make a
mistake:} 22. Nd2 $2 Rhe8 $1 {.}) 22... Qb5 23. Rxf7+ {(2)} Kb8 24. Re6 {(5)}
Rd8 {(3)} 25. c4 {(2) Remarkably, Gheorghiu later found a follower!} ({The
game Yakovich-Akesson (Stockholm 1999) continued} 25. Qe4 Bc7 26. g3 {, and in
view of} Rd1+ 27. Ne1 Ra7 28. Re8+ {Black resigned.}) 25... Qc6 ({If} 25... Qa5
{there was the immediately decisive} 26. Qe4 Ra7 ({or} 26... Bc7 27. Re8 (27.
Nd4 $5) 27... Ra7 {, when White has a pleasant choice between} 28. Ne5 $1 {
(Stohl)} ({and} 28. Qe5 $3)) 27. Rxd6 $1 {.}) 26. Ne5 Qc8 {(2)} 27. Qb1 $1 ({
Not the only way, but the most elegant one:} 27. Qb1 b5 28. cxb5 {with
unavoidable mate. --- Times: 1.22-2.00.}) (27. -- {In the meantime, misfortune
struck the other leader, Beliavsky: with an extra rook and a completely won
position against van der Wiel, in a time scramble he even missed a draw! Tal
too was desperate for a win, but with White he was unable to overcome the
inspired play of Quinteros. But Geller won against Velimirovic and finally
caught up his rivals. The leading positions became: Kasparov 8 out of 11 (plus
one adjourned game), Tal, Geller and Garcia - 7½ out of 12, Andersson - 7 
(+1), Beliavsky - 6½ (+2). --- Next came the highly important adjournment
day before the final round. It immediately transpired that in his adjourned
game with me Rodriguez had sealed a losing move! I quickly converted my
advantage and, by reaching 9 points, secured a place in the Candidates. ---
Beliavsky had to endure far more difficult trials. First, an exhausting
eight-hour adjournment session with Andersson - a draw on the 108th move! Then,
on the day of the last round, a morning adjournment session with Rodriguez,
during which the Lvov grandmaster, when just a couple of steps away from a win,
suddenly left a piece en prise and only by a miracle gained a draw (which gave
me sole first place ahead of schedule: now all five pursuers were one and half
points behind). And after such sufferings, that evening, composed and
imperturbable as always, Beliavsky came on to the stage to join battle against
Gheorghiu with Black. And, by winning, he won the second qualifying place into
the Candidates matches! This was a deserved reward for courage... --- The
other contenders no longer had the strength for a final spurt: Andersson and
Tal agreed a draw on the 17th move, while in terrible time-trouble Geller and
Garcia lost with Black to Sax and Rodriguez respectively.}) (27. -- {At the
finish I had to battle with grandmaster Dragoljub Velimirovic - a legendary
expert on Sicilian attacks. The game did not affect the allocation of places
in the tournament, but Velimirovic had White and he was eager for a fight! He
very much wanted to become the first Yugoslav player to win against me (in
fact it was to be Ivan Sokolov - in 1999!). I did not risk employing the
Sicilian Defence against him, and so I chose the solid Caro-Kann (cf.
'Revolution in the 70s', p.226). But here too a sharp fight developed, in
which fortune was on my side: after passing through a very dangerous position,
I won. And as a result I scored 10 points out of 13 - even more than in
Bugojno! --- Not everything went smoothly for me over the course of this
fierce race, and things were very difficult for me in the games with my main
rivals (in this respect it was one of my worst tournaments!), but the sensibly
chosen tournament strategy helped me to overcome both my excessive anxiety,
and my lack of experience. Closer to the finish I endeavoured above all to
control my emotions, so as not to get carried away and not to end up in
time-trouble. Lack of time was felt occasionally, but not once was I in
serious time-trouble. I also had hardly any adjournments. --- A study of the
experience of the other two Interzonal Tournaments allowed me to conclude that
the main thing was to pace myself correctly. Indeed, in Las Palmas and Toluca
victory went not to the player who had a brisk start (and then was constantly
wondering how not to fritter away his lead), but to the one who retained his
strength for a finishing burst. And when at the end I managed to win four
games in a row, it became clear that I had paced myself correctly.}) (27. -- {
In my view, the Moscow Interzonal was the strongest in terms of the main
contenders, and the most fighting of the three tournaments. There were hardly
any 'grandmaster' draws, and the number of decisive games comprised 54.9%,
against 50.6% in Las Palmas and 46.2% in Toluca. Just think: before the last
round in Moscow no less than five players were in contention for second place!
--- And so, at the end of September all eight grandmasters, who were to meet
in the Candidates matches the following year, 1983, had been determined. In
the 'upper' half of the pairing list were Korchnoi, Hübner (finalists in the
previous cycle), Kasparov and Ribli (outright winners of the Interzonals), and
in the 'lower' half - Portisch, Beliavsky, Smyslov and Torre. The match
pairings were due to be made two weeks later in Lucerne, at the end of the
Olympiad. --- Ahead lay one-to-one battles with top-class players, and I
optimistically awaited these new, unknown tests. However, I was concerned
about the fact that, in nearly all the key games of the Interzonal Tournament,
against the strongest opponents I had dubious positions. A warning signal!
Obviously there was still an enormous field for improvement. Within exactly
two years the match with Karpov was to show that I had not even imagined the
extent of this field.}) 1-0

[Event "?"]
[Site "?"]
[Date "????.??.??"]
[Round "?"]
[White "First 'Oscar'"]
[Black "?"]
[Result "*"]
[Annotator "Garry Kasparov"]
[PlyCount "1"]
[EventDate "1984.??.??"]
[SourceDate "2012.12.08"]

{25th World Chess Olympiad (Lucerne, 30th October - 16th November 1982): 1.
USSR - 42½ out of 56; 2. Czechoslovakia - 36; 3-4. USA and Yugoslavia - 35½; 5-6. Hungary and Bulgaria - 33½; 7. Poland - 33; etc. (altogether 92
teams). The winning team comprised Karpov (6½ out of 8), Kasparov (8½
out of 11), Polugayevsky (6 out of 9), Beliavsky (7 out of 10), reserves Tal 
(6½ out of 8) and Yusupov (8 out of 10).} 1. -- {After the achievements of
the Hungarian team at the two previous Olympiads, the forthcoming Olympiad in
the Swiss town of Lucerne was destined to answer a burning question: would the
Soviet grandmasters be able to demonstrate their superiority, or had the times
of the hegemony of one chess power irreversibly passed? --- The USSR team was
undoubtedly the strongest, while the next teams on the rating list - USA,
Hungary, Yugoslavia and Czechoslovakia - looked roughly equal. However, the
general opinion was that the only teams that could really compete with us were
the Hungarians (led by Portisch and Ribli) and the Americans with their
uniform grandmaster line-up (Browne, Seirawan, Alburt, Kavalek, Christiansen
and Tarjan). True, also with a good line-up were the Yugoslavs (in the end
their leader Ljubojevic scored 11 out of 14!) and the Czechs (Hort, Smejkal
and the swiftly progressing Ftacnik).} (1. -- {In the first found we crushed
New Zealand - 4-0 (I won with Black against Sarapu), and in the second round
Chile - 3½-½. But the race was led by the American team, who won both
matches by a whitewash. The crucial USSR-USA battle took place in the third
round. --- In that memorable match I played for the first time against a
defector - Lev Alburt, and around such games there was always an especially
tense atmosphere. Before the round the managers of the Soviet team insistently
advised me to avoid the traditional handshake with my opponent. Feeling
terribly nervous, I arrived for the game and stood a metre away from the chess
table, to avoid accidentally running into the approaching 'deserter'. But
Alburt fully appreciated my position: he calmly sat down at the board and made
his first move. A few years later Lev told me that before the game he had
discussed this problem with Korchnoi and Igor Ivanov, and they decided not to
put me on the spot (incidentally, before his game with Karpov at the 1980
Olympiad, Alburt demonstratively held out his hand, but the world champion
equally demonstratively disregarded it). The game began - and all my anxiety
immediately vanished.}) *

[Event "76: World Chess Olympiad, Lucerne"]
[Site "?"]
[Date "1982.11.01"]
[Round "3"]
[White "Alburt, L."]
[Black "Kasparov, G."]
[Result "0-1"]
[ECO "E73"]
[Annotator "Garry Kasparov"]
[PlyCount "114"]
[EventDate "1982.??.??"]
[Source "Everyman Chess"]
[SourceDate "2012.11.28"]

1. c4 g6 2. d4 Bg7 3. Nc3 Nf6 4. e4 d6 5. Be2 O-O 6. Bg5 Nbd7 ({In Daugavpils
in 1978 I managed to win against Alburt in the problematic variation} 6... c5
7. d5 h6 ({not} 7... b5 $6 {- Game Nos. 58, 67}) 8. Bf4 e6 {, but later it
transpired that White's play can be improved, and Black's counter-improvement
leads only to a draw (cf. Game No.28). And on this occasion I followed a
different, less forcing course, but again I encountered a surprise!}) 7. Qc1 {
This seemingly artificial move has a logical justification;} ({after the usual
} 7. Qd2 e5 8. d5 Nc5 {, White is forced to defend his e4-pawn with the
unaesthetic} ({and if first} 8... a5 {, then after} 9. Nf3 Nc5 {the white
knight will occupy the vacant d2-square. Here there is nothing terrible for
Black, and he can calmly complete his development, but that was what the
opponent was expecting...}) 9. f3 ({or} 9. Bf3) ({whereas now there is the
simple} 9. b4 $1 {. --- I pondered for a long time over the virtues and
drawbacks of 7 Qc1 and finally decided to act in the spirit of the Benko
Gambit.})) 7... c5 {(48)} 8. d5 b5 $5 (8... Qa5 {is too sluggish:} 9. Bd2 $1 a6
10. Nf3 {(Alburt-Zapata, New York 1980). At that time information travelled
slowly around the world and I did not know of the existence of this game.}) 9.
cxb5 a6 10. a4 {(11) A well-tested method of play against all varieties of
the Benko Gambit: by reinforcing his b5-point, White restricts the opponent's
counterplay on the queenside.} Qa5 {(2)} 11. Bd2 {The position resembles my
Tilburg game with Spassky (Game No.58), but there the useful move Ra3 had been
made, whereas here White has played the useless Qc1, which Black is able to
exploit.} axb5 $1 {(2) A timely exchange, ruling out the reply a4xb5.} ({After
} 11... Qb4 $6 12. f3 {the queen would have risked being trapped.}) 12. Nxb5 {
(6)} ({This is somewhat stronger than} 12. Bxb5 Ba6 $1 13. Nf3 ({or} 13. Nge2
Qb4 14. f3 Ne5 15. O-O Nc4 {with adequate counterplay}) 13... Qb4 {.}) 12...
Qb6 {(2)} 13. Qc2 {(2) White wants to develop his pieces harmoniously,
without making any positional concessions. Previously I criticised this move,
which leaves the rook at a1 undefended, but there is nothing better.} ({After
the modest} 13. Qb1 {there would have been the good reply} c4 $5 14. Bxc4 Ng4 (
14... Nc5 $5) 15. Nh3 Nc5) ({while in the event of} 13. f3 Ne5 {Black also has
excellent prospects:} 14. f4 $6 Ned7 15. Qc2 ({or} 15. Qc4 Ba6 {etc.}) 15... c4
$1 {.}) 13... Ba6 {(27)} ({The sacrifice of a second pawn looked very tempting
-} 13... c4 $5 14. Qxc4 (14. Nf3 $5 Nc5 15. O-O {with the idea of Be3 and Bxc4
is safer}) 14... Nc5 {, for example:} 15. e5 ({or} 15. f3 Bd7 {, aiming to
exploit White's retarded development}) 15... Nxd5 $1 16. a5 Be6 $1 17. b4 Nd7 {
. After some hesitation I chose the more traditional course.}) 14. Nf3 {(10)} (
{I also criticised this natural developing move and suggested the prophylactic
} 14. Ra3 {, after which Black could either play} Rfe8 {and ... e7-e6,} ({or
try to exploit his lead in development by} 14... c4 $5 {.})) ({After} 14. Rd1 {
, which I gave in 'Informator',} c4 $1 {is also strong.}) 14... Bxb5 $1 {(7)} (
{Successfully avoiding the temptation to sacrifice the queen in another way -} 
14... Nxe4 $2 15. Qxe4 Bxb5 16. Bxb5 Qxb5 17. axb5 Rxa1+ 18. Ke2 Rxh1 19. Qxe7
{would have led to disaster:} -- (19... Nb6 {(e5)} 20. Qxd6) ({, while if} 
19... Nf6 {White decides matters with the elegant} 20. b6 $1 Rb1 (20... Re8 21.
Qxe8+ $1) 21. b4 Nxd5 22. Qe4 $1 ({instead of the drawing line} 22. Qxf8+ $2
Bxf8 23. b7 Nf4+ $1 24. Ke3 Nd5+ 25. Ke2 ({but not} 25. Ke4 $2 Nxb4 $1 26. b8=Q
f5+ {winning the newly-born queen.})))) 15. Bxb5 Qxb5 16. axb5 Rxa1+ 17. Bc1
Nxe4 {After the fall of this pawn the fate of the d5-pawn is also decided.} ({
After} 17... Rb8 $6 18. O-O Rxb5 19. Bd2 $1 {White would have consolidated his
position, retaining a material advantage.}) 18. O-O Nef6 {Previously I
assessed this position in favour of Black, who for the queen has rook, knight
and at least one pawn (after ...Nxd5). Also obvious is the weakness of White's
queenside pawns and the great mobility of the black pieces, especially the
knights, which have convenient posts. But now I think that the position is one
of dynamic balance, although it is not easy for White to find the correct plan.
He must aim to create counter-threats or advantageously exchange pieces, in
order to exploit the power of the queen.} 19. b4 $5 {(14) At the cost of the
d5-pawn (which all the same is doomed), White breaks up Black's pawn group in
the centre and increases the value of the passed b5-pawn.} ({However, also
suitable was either} 19. Nd2 Rb8 20. Nc4 {and Bd2(g5)}) ({or the immediate} 19.
Bg5 $5 {with a sound enough position.}) 19... Nxd5 {(4)} ({In the event of} 
19... Rb8 20. Bd2 Rxf1+ 21. Kxf1 Rxb5 22. Qc4 Rb8 23. bxc5 Rb1+ 24. Ne1 Nxc5
25. Qa2 {Black's achievements are also slight.}) 20. Bd2 $1 {(9)} Rfa8 $1 {(13)
} ({Here too I had to resist the temptation of a pretty variation:} 20... Rxf1+
21. Kxf1 cxb4 22. Qc6 $6 b3 $6 (22... N7b6 {is equal}) 23. Qxd5 $2 ({all the
brilliance is ruined by} 23. Ba5 $1 b2 24. Nd2 {, and earlier by the simple 22
Qb3!}) 23... b2 24. Qa2 Rc8 {and wins.}) 21. bxc5 ({In 'The Test of Time' for
some reason I recommended preparing a shelter for the king by} 21. g3 {(?!)
and I myself indicated} R1a2 $1 22. Qe4 e6 {with the initiative for Black.})
21... Rxf1+ {Trying to drive the white king into the centre;} ({although the
immediate} 21... Nxc5 $5 {would have been more 'normal'.}) 22. Kxf1 Ra1+ 23.
Ke2 {(4)} Nxc5 24. Qc4 $2 {(5) Only this mistake changes the character of the
play to Black's advantage.} ({My 'Informator' suggestion} 24. Ne1 Ra3 $1 {
would also have suited him.}) ({However,} 24. Ng5 $1 {(with the idea of Ne4,
which disappears after 24 Qc4?)} Ra4 25. f3 $1 {(the white king's placing is
no worse at e2 than at f1)} Nb6 26. Ne4 Rc4 27. Qb1 Ne6 ({or} 27... Nca4 28.
Ba5) 28. Be3 {would have maintained the dynamic balance.}) 24... e6 {Now, to
all appearances, the b-pawn is doomed.} 25. b6 $5 {(5) Immediately
sacrificing the pawn for the sake of activating the queen.} ({It would also
have been lost after the unhurried} 25. g3 {(of course, it was not for this
that Alburt played his queen to c4)} Bc3 $5 26. b6 (26. Bxc3 $6 Ra4 $1) 26...
Bxd2 27. Nxd2 Ra2 28. b7 Rb2 29. Qc1 Rb4 $1 {followed by ...Nxb7,} (29... Rxb7
30. Ne4 $1 {.})) 25... Nxb6 {(5)} ({It was tempting not to move the knight
away, but after} 25... Rb1 26. Qa2 $1 Rxb6 $6 (26... Ra1 $1) 27. Qa8+ Bf8 28.
Bh6 Nd7 29. Bxf8 ({or} 29. Qd8 Rb8 30. Qxd7 Bxh6 31. g3 $1 {with equality})
29... Nxf8 30. Ng5 {White would have achieved his aim - equality thanks to the
maximum activation of his pieces:} Rb2+ (30... Nf6 31. Qd8 $1) (30... h6 31.
Nh7 $1 {is no better}) ({while my 'Informator' suggestion} 30... Kg7 {(?) is
even fatal because of} 31. Qa7 $1) 31. Ke1 Nb4 32. Nxh7 Nd3+ 33. Kd1 Nxf2+ 34.
Kc1 Nd3+ 35. Kd1 Kxh7 36. Qxf8 {, and the queen guarantees a draw.}) 26. Qb5
Nbd7 27. Be3 {(5)} Bf8 {(9) Black is temporarily forced to retreat, retaining
the hope of gradually advancing his central pawns.} 28. Nd4 {(22) Now White
cannot afford to wait, but with pieces alone Black's position cannot be broken
up.} ({The energetic} 28. g4) ({or} 28. h4 $5 {came into consideration.}) 28...
Ra2+ {(3)} 29. Kf1 Ra1+ {Checks to gain on the clock with time-trouble
imminent.} 30. Ke2 e5 (30... d5 {looks more natural, but I wanted to restrict
the white bishop, assuming that the opponent would be unable to exploit the
weakness of the d5-square.}) ({However, it was not essential to determine the
placing of the pawns immediately: the preparatory} 30... Ra6 {(a7) was also
good.}) 31. Nc6 {(3)} Ra2+ 32. Kf1 {(4)} Ra1+ 33. Ke2 Ra2+ 34. Kf1 Ra6 $5 {(2)
Continuing to look for ways to strengthen his position, Black tries to evict
the knight from c6. Alburt did not like this...} 35. Bxc5 $6 {(9)} ({In the
event of} 35. Nd8 $6 d5 $1 36. Bxc5 Nxc5 37. Qe8 Rf6 $1 {the d5-pawn is taboo:}
38. Qxe5 Rxf2+ $1 39. Kg1 Ne4 {(} 40. Qxd5 $2 Rf5 $1 {and wins).}) ({But} 35.
Nb4 $5 Ra1+ 36. Ke2 Rb1 37. Qa5 {came into consideration, when what Black
should do next is not clear. Possibly he would have had to regret playing 30...e5.}) 35... Nxc5 $6 {An error in reply.} ({At this point, in contrast to the
similar situation on the 22nd move, it was definitely better to interpose} 
35... Ra1+ $1 36. Ke2 Ra2+ {, and only after} 37. Kf1 {(e3) -} Nxc5 {.}) 36. g3
$1 {(now the king acquires a shelter, and Black's chances of success are
reduced)} Ra1+ 37. Kg2 Ne6 38. Qb8 {(6)} Rd1 (38... Kg7 $2 39. Nxe5 $1 {with
equality.}) 39. Qb2 {(6)} Rd5 {(2)} 40. Qb8 {(2)} Rc5 {(2)} (40... Rd2) ({or} 
40... Kg7 {, recommended by me in 'The Test of Time', is no better. --- Here
the game was adjourned, and it was resumed two hours later. In a brief joint
analysis with Yusupov and our team trainer Makarychev some promising ideas
were found. However, the position is a 'practical' one, in which what proves
decisive is not so much analysis, as inventiveness during play. To fight for
an advantage it is desirable to exchange the white knight (then the queen is
deprived of support), but this is not easily done.}) 41. Ne7+ {(20) The
sealed move.} ({The superficial} 41. Nb4 $6 {would have allowed} Nc7 $1 {
(threatening ...Rb5)} 42. Nd3 Rc3 43. Nb4 Rb3 $1 {with the unavoidable
exchange of knights, after which White would be forced to passively await the
advance of the black pawns.}) 41... Kg7 42. Nc8 {The only move which preserves
the knight.} (42. Qe8 $6 Bxe7 43. Qxe7 d5 {favours Black}) ({while in the
event of} 42. Qxd6 $2 h5 $1 {White would altogether lose a piece:} 43. Kg1 ({or
} 43. h3 e4 44. Kg1 Kh7 $1 45. Qb8 Bxe7 46. Qe8 Bg5 47. Qxf7+ Ng7 {etc.}) 43...
Kh7 $1 {with the threat of ...Rc7.}) 42... Rd5 43. Qa8 {(5) The struggle
revolves around ...d6-d5.} ({It was also quite acceptable to play} 43. Qb7 Rd2
44. Qb4 $1 ({previously I considered only} 44. Nb6 {(?)} d5 $1 45. Nxd5 ({or} 
45. Nd7 Nc5 $1) 45... Bc5) 44... Rd4 45. Qb8 {.}) 43... Rd2 {(7)} 44. Nb6 {(6)}
Nc5 {(9)} ({The impatient} 44... d5 $2 {would have allowed White to force a
draw by} 45. Qa5 $1 Rc2 (45... Rb2 46. Nc4 $1) 46. Nxd5 Bc5 47. Ne3 $1 {.}) 45.
Nc4 {(2)} Rd4 {(4)} 46. Ne3 Be7 {(2)} 47. h4 {(1) Defending against ...Bg5,
but allowing the fixing of the kingside pawns and weakening the g4-square, to
where the black knight can leap. Nevertheless, White's position is still quite
solid.} h5 {(2)} 48. Nd5 {(3)} Bd8 $1 ({Tactical nuances again help the
overall strategic idea! Black is ready to carry out the manoeuvre of his
knight to f6 (and possibly to g4), as planned in our analysis, for example:} 
48... Bd8 49. Qc6 (49. Qxd8 $2 Rxd5 {is suicidal}) 49... Ne4 $1 50. Ne3 Nf6 {.}
) 49. Kf3 $6 {(7) White's thoughts are aimed at parrying the ...Ne4-f6
manoeuvre, but, despite the limited amount of material remaining, it is
dangerous to bring the king into the centre!} ({After} 49. Nc3 $1 Ne6 (49...
Be7 50. Nd5) 50. Qa7 {it would hardly have been possible for Black to
strengthen his position (} Nc7 51. Qb8 {). --- The move made by Alburt
surprised me: just before the time control White securely sheltered his king,
and suddenly on the resumption he again brought it into the centre - obviously
the wrong place! I was tuned up for a lengthy adjournment session with a
completely unclear result, but the opponent's unexpected 'activity' led
quickly to disaster.}) 49... Ne6 $1 {(3) With the positional threat of ...Nc7.
} ({The previous plan with} 49... Ne4 {would have run into one of two
refutations:} 50. Qxd8 ({or} 50. Qb7 Nc3 (50... Nf6 51. Nb4) 51. Nxc3 Rd3+ 52.
Ke2 Rxc3 53. Qd7 Bc7 54. f4 $1 {, also with sufficient counterplay against the
king}) 50... Nd2+ 51. Ke2 Rxd5 52. g4 $1 hxg4 53. h5 $1 Ne4 (53... Nf3 54. h6+
$1 Kxh6 55. Qf8+ {and Qxf7}) 54. hxg6 Nf6 55. gxf7 {relying on the open
position of the black king.}) 50. Qc6 $1 {(6)} ({After} 50. Kg2 {, admitting
his mistake, in 'Informator' I gave} Nc7 ({in 'The Test of Time' the more
unpleasant} 50... Bxh4 $1 51. gxh4 $2 ({but} 51. Qc6 $1 Bf6 52. Qxd6 h4 53. Qc6
{is far more resilient}) 51... Rxd5 {was suggested}) {, but the bold} 51. Nxc7
Bxc7 52. f4 $1 exf4 53. Qa1 Bb6 54. gxf4 Kh7 55. f5 {gives White drawing
chances. --- Here I sank into thought, staring at my rook - with revulsion! If
it were not on the board, the fork ...Nd4+ would be decisive, and
self-sacrificing attempts are simply ignored by White: 50...Rxh4 51 Qxd6 or 50.
..Rf4+ 51 Ke3.}) 50... Rd2 $1 {(27) When he saw this move, for some reason
Alburt became extremely nervous.} ({Possibly he had mainly been expecting the
dashing} 50... e4+ $6 {, but this would merely have reduced my chances: after}
51. Kg2 Bxh4 52. Qxd6 Bf6 53. Qc6 Be5 54. Ne3 {the weakness of the e4-pawn
would have restricted Black. As we will now see, a similar position (but with
the pawn on e5) could have arisen in the game if White had played 51 Kg2.}) 51.
Ke3 $4 {(4) Preparing Qxd6, White suddenly commits hara-kiri.} ({The immediate
} 51. Qxd6 {would have led after} Bc7 $1 52. Qd7 Bb6 $1 53. Nxb6 Rxd7 54. Nxd7
f6 55. Ke4 Kf7 {to a problematic knight endgame where Black is a pawn up but
the outcome is not yet altogether clear.}) ({In 'Informator' and then also in
'The Test of Time' I gave the variation} 51. Kg2 $1 Bxh4 $1 52. Qxd6 (52. gxh4
$2 Rxd5 $1) 52... Bf6 {, in which 'the threat of ...h5-h4 and the weakness of
the f2-point give Black real winning chances'. However, after the approximate}
53. Qc6 Bd8 54. Qd6 Bc7 55. Qc6 Bb8 56. Qb6 Rxd5 57. Qxb8 {, even despite the
exchange of the white knight, a draw is far more real.}) ({Stronger than} 51.
Qc4 Nc5) ({or} 51. Qb7 e4+ 52. Ke3 Rd3+ 53. Ke2 Bxh4 {.}) 51... Re2+ $1 {The
fork nevertheless operated! The instantaneous sobering up proved bitter for
Alburt - the road back is cut off. A brief agony ensues.} 52. Kd3 ({(of course,
not} 52. Kxe2 Nd4+ {and ...Nxc6)}) 52... e4+ 53. Kc4 (53. Kc3 Rc2+ $1 {.})
53... Rc2+ 54. Nc3 Bf6 55. Qxe4 Rxc3+ 56. Kd5 Rc5+ 57. Kxd6 Be5+ ({After} 57...
Be5+ 58. Kd7 Rc7+ 59. Ke8 Bd6 {(f6) mate is unavoidable. --- Times: 3.10-3.25.}
) (57... -- {I should remind you that the names of Korchnoi and Alburt were
expunged from Soviet chess literature. But in the event of resounding wins
over the 'renegades', exceptions were made. Thus this complicated, fighting
game, and my subsequent duels with Korchnoi were published with annotations in
the Soviet chess press and then in the games collection 'The Test of Time'.
--- By scoring 2½ from the three adjourned games we defeated the American
team 3-1. And in the 4th round we also overcame the Yugoslavs after a tough
fight: 2½-1½ (I won against Gligoric). The fate of this match was also
decided during the resumption - thanks to our superior analysis of the
adjourned games. During the two-hour break we were able to discover resources
which our opponents had not even contemplated. In this way several 'extra'
half-points were gained.}) (57... -- {After four rounds the teams of the USSR
and Czechoslovakia were leading on 13 out of 16. By defeating our main rivals
2½-1½ in the 5th round (I drew with Smejkal), the Soviet team became the
sole leader. The 6th round saw our only drawn match at this Olympiad, with the
Dutch: 2-2 (I had to be satisfied with a draw against Sosonko). In the 7th
round we defeated the West German team 2½-1½. Playing for the first time
on board 1, I drew with Black against a cautious Hübner. --- Mid-way through
the tournament, after winning two matches by a big margin, the Hungarian team
finally moved up (USSR - 20 out of 28; Hungary, USA, Czechoslovakia - 19). The
8th round USSR-Hungary clash was probably decisive in the fight for first
place, and we won 2½-1½. Karpov confidently defeated Portisch with White
(cf. Game No.88 in Volume V of 'My Great Predecessors', note to White's 12th
move), and with Black I found I was able without particular difficulty to
neutralise Ribli's initiative.}) (57... -- {After negotiating the main matches,
we began playing easily and without restraint: 3½-½, 4-0, 4-0 and 3½-½ - these were the results of the Soviet team's matches with some quite strong
teams: England, Switzerland, Argentina and Romania. --- In the 9th round match
against England I again played on board 1, and my opponent was the 27-year-old
John Nunn (see the following game), the only grandmaster in the world who was
a Doctor of Mathematics. The unexpected outcome was an attractive miniature,
which appealed to both the public and the journalists, who attentively
followed my play as leader of the team.}) 0-1

[Event "77: World Chess Olympiad, Lucerne"]
[Site "?"]
[Date "1982.11.08"]
[Round "9"]
[White "Kasparov, G."]
[Black "Nunn, J."]
[Result "1-0"]
[ECO "A67"]
[Annotator "Garry Kasparov"]
[PlyCount "41"]
[EventDate "1982.??.??"]
[Source "Everyman Chess"]
[SourceDate "2012.11.28"]

1. d4 Nf6 2. c4 e6 3. Nc3 $1 {(6) The exclamation mark is for the underlying
psychology of this move. Nunn was a Modern Benoni devotee and had even written
an extensive book about it. And, anticipating the reply ...c7-c5, I made the
move which allows White the widest choice of continuations.} c5 4. d5 exd5 5.
cxd5 d6 6. e4 {(7)} g6 7. f4 {I wanted to choose this aggressive variation,
which I had already tried against Kuijpers (Dortmund 1980).} Bg7 8. Bb5+ Nfd7 (
{Up until now the gambit line} 8... Nbd7 $5 9. e5 dxe5 10. fxe5 Nh5 11. e6 Qh4+
{etc. has also not been refuted.}) 9. a4 {Magerramov and I considered this
move to be more dangerous for Black than 9 Bd3, which was popular at that time:
now the bishop can retreat not only to d3, but all the same the a2-a4 advance
comes into White's plans.} Na6 {An original idea: Black saves a tempo by not
castling, in order to direct his knight immediately to the weakened b4-point
and play ...a7-a6.} (9... O-O {is more natural, but that is what Kuijpers
played against me, and after} 10. Nf3 a6 11. Be2 Nf6 12. O-O Qc7 $2 13. e5 $1 {
White gained a strong attack.}) ({Another fashionable idea is} 9... Qh4+ $5 10.
g3 Qe7 {(d8), weakening the opponent's kingside at the cost of a tempo.}) 10.
Nf3 Nb4 {(3)} 11. O-O {(10)} a6 $5 {(3)} ({After} 11... O-O 12. Re1 $1 a6 13.
Bf1 Nf6 14. h3 {it would not have been easy for Black to create counterplay.})
({Nunn's idea looks attractive: both} 11... a6 12. Bc4 {with the intention of ...Nb6 and ...Bg4,} ({and} 12. Be2 O-O 13. Be3 Nf6 {give Black good counterplay.
And so I devised something rather more energetic...})) 12. Bxd7+ $5 {(16) The
justification for this 'illogical' exchange is the inability of the remaining
knight at b4 to take part in the defence of the kingside. Some of the other
black pieces are also seemingly out of it, whereas White's come into play
without hindrance (although it is not at all easy to derive any direct benefit
from this).} Bxd7 13. f5 $1 {Another provocative move! However, it is not easy
for Black to exploit the weakening of the e5-square, and White restricts the
bishop on d7. The character of the play has changed sharply: Black is obliged
to think about parrying the threats that have arisen, and Nunn lost his
composure. True, his initial replies were the most natural...} O-O $1 {(31)} ({
The black king urgently moves away from the centre, as otherwise it could have
been in serious trouble, for example:} 13... c4 {(an attempt to bring the
knight at b4 into play)} 14. Bg5 ({Nunn thought that the simple} 14. Be3 {was
also quite unpleasant}) 14... Qb6+ 15. Kh1 Nd3 16. f6 Bf8 17. a5 $1 Nf2+ (17...
Qxb2 $6 18. Bd2 $1) 18. Rxf2 Qxf2 19. Na4 {(my previous recommendation)} ({or} 
19. e5 $5 {with an obvious numerical superiority on the decisive part of the
board})) (13... gxf5 14. Bg5 f6 ({or} 14... Bf6 15. Bf4 $1 {- I tried to parry
this with} O-O 16. Bxd6 Bxa4 {, but after} 17. Qe1 $1 {with the idea of Qg3+
things are difficult for Black:} Qxd6 18. e5 Qe7 19. d6 Qe8 20. Nxa4 {etc.})
15. Bf4 Qc7 {, and in the event of} 16. Nd2 ({but} 16. exf5 $1 O-O-O 17. Rc1
Bxf5 18. Nd4 $1 Bg6 (18... cxd4 $2 19. Nb5) ({or} 18... Bd7 $2 19. Ne4 {is bad
for Black}) 19. Ne6 {gives White an advantage}) 16... O-O-O $1 ({but not} 16...
Nd3 $2 17. Bxd6 $1 {and Nc4}) 17. Nc4 ({or} 17. exf5 Bf8 {both sides have
chances}) 17... Bf8 {.}) 14. Bg5 {(7)} f6 {(11)} ({After} 14... Bf6 $2 15. Qd2
$1 {, with the exchange of bishops, the king's defences are weakened too much:}
c4 ({or} 15... Bxg5 16. Nxg5 c4 17. f6 h6 18. e5 $1 dxe5 19. Ne6 $3 {with a
strong attack}) 16. Bxf6 Qxf6 17. Nd1 $1 {and Ne3,} (17. Ne1 $5 {.})) ({And
the tactical trick} 14... Bd4+ $6 {, hoping for} 15. Qxd4 $2 ({did not work
because of} 15. Kh1 f6 16. Bh6 Rf7 {(e8)} 17. Rb1 Be5 18. Nxe5 {etc. with a
great positional superiority for White}) 15... cxd4 16. Bxd8 dxc3 17. bxc3 Nxd5
{with equality.}) 15. Bf4 gxf5 {(1)} ({Earlier I attached a question mark to
the pawn capture, thinking that 'this attempt somehow to complicate the game
leads to catastrophe', and recommended} 15... Qe7 {(?) as the lesser evil.} 16.
-- ({. Here Nunn suggested} 16. Re1 {, but this is unclear in view of} c4 $1
17. Qd2 Nd3 {.}) ({. On the other hand, after} 16. fxg6 $1 hxg6 17. Nh4 {
(exploiting the position of the queen at e7)} Kh7 18. Qf3 $1 {, it is hard to
offer Black any good advice:} ({my earlier move} 18. Bg3 {(?) is bad because of
} c4 $1 19. Qf3 Bh6) 18... f5 $6 (18... Bh6 19. Nxg6 $1 Kxg6 20. Qg3+ Kh5 21.
Bxh6 $1 Rg8 (21... Kxh6 $2 22. Rf4 $1 {and wins}) 22. Qf4 {with an extra pawn
and an attack}) 19. Qh3 $1 {.})) (15... g5 $2 {is even worse:} 16. Bxd6 Bxa4
17. Rxa4 Qxd6 18. e5 fxe5 19. Nxg5 {and wins (Gheorghiu-Kertesz, Romania 1982).
}) ({However,} 15... Qc7 $5 16. a5 Rfe8 17. Nd2 Bb5 {would have offered
possibilities of a tenacious defence.}) 16. Bxd6 {(6)} Bxa4 $2 {(4) Only this
counter-stroke, on which Nunn was relying, proves to be a decisive mistake.} (
16... Re8 $1 {was essential.} 17. -- ({. Now little is promised by either} 17.
Nd2 fxe4 18. Ncxe4 f5 $1 (18... b6 $6 19. Ra3 $1 {is dangerous}) 19. Nxc5 Nxd5)
({, or} 17. Bxc5 fxe4 18. Nd4 ({while after} 18. Qb3 $5 exf3 19. Qxb4 fxg2 20.
Rf2 {it is altogether slight}) 18... f5 $1 ({but not} 18... Nd3 {(?)} 19. Nxe4
$1 {, given by me in 'Informator' and 'The Test of Time'}) 19. Bxb4 (19. Nxf5
$2 Bxf5 20. Rxf5 Qc8 $1) 19... Qb6 $1 20. Nce2 Qxb4 21. Nxf5 Bxf5 22. Rxf5 Rad8
23. Kh1 {(in 2008 this is how one of the games went from the championship of
Lower Saxony!)} e3 $1 {, and White's advantage evaporates. --- Thus my plan
with 12 Bxd7 proved to be good mainly for the reason that it set the opponent
difficult practical problems.})) 17. Rxa4 (17. Nxa4 $1 Qxd6 18. Nh4 $1 {was
even stronger.}) 17... Qxd6 18. Nh4 $1 {(1) The knight triumphantly
establishes itself at f5, where its value immediately increases several times
over.} fxe4 {All the lines allowing 19 Nxf5 were hardly any more resilient.}
19. Nf5 Qd7 {Black's resistance has been broken;} ({if} 19... Qe5 {, then} 20.
Qg4 Rf7 21. Nh6+ {.}) 20. Nxe4 Kh8 ({No better was} 20... b6 21. Ra3 $1) ({or} 
20... Rae8 21. Qg4 {with the threats of Nh6+ and Nxc5, and in some cases d5-d6.
}) 21. Nxc5 {(2)} ({In view of} 21. Nxc5 Qxd5 22. Qxd5 Nxd5 23. Ne6 {. Times:
1.06-1.14.}) 1-0

[Event "78: World Chess Olympiad, Lucerne"]
[Site "?"]
[Date "1982.11.09"]
[Round "10"]
[White "Korchnoi, V."]
[Black "Kasparov, G."]
[Result "0-1"]
[ECO "A64"]
[Annotator "Garry Kasparov"]
[PlyCount "72"]
[EventDate "1982.??.??"]
[Source "Everyman Chess"]
[SourceDate "2012.11.28"]

{The centrepiece of the 10th round, and of the entire Olympiad, was my game
with the recent participant in the world championship match, Viktor Korchnoi,
the famous defector, who was leading the Swiss team. Karpov diplomatically
avoided meeting him - he would have had to play Black 'on the opponent's home
ground' and he obviously did not want to take the risk. Besides, I could have
come unstuck: this was my first encounter at the board with Korchnoi (not
counting our meeting much earlier in a simul' - Game No.12), it was my eighth
successive game without being substituted, and there was very limited time for
preparing to play Black against the great 'Viktor the Terrible'. However, in
trying to expose me, Karpov miscalculated and, in effect, did me a service.
This very difficult test for me turned into a grandiose battle! --- Again the
problem of the handshake arose. On this occasion I announced to the leaders
that I was intending to shake Korchnoi's hand. And when I was told that I 'did
not understand the Party line', I replied: 'Then let Polugayevsky play instead
of me'. But Polugayevsky had no desire at all to play against Korchnoi. They
tried to win me round literally right up to the start of the round, but I was
unyielding. On arriving in the playing hall, I immediately sat down at the
board and awaited my opponent, who was slightly late. He approached the board
rapidly, and I stood up slightly, ready to respond to his greeting. However,
Korchnoi did not even look at me, but immediately pushed forward his queen's
pawn, and the game began (I should remind you that this course of behaviour
before a game with me was worked out beforehand by Korchnoi together with
Alburt and Igor Ivanov). Our doleful leaders no doubt breathed a sigh of
relief... --- Now all my energy was focused on the game, which was of
exceptional psychological importance. Although the organisers demonstrated it
on numerous television monitors, arranged around the enormous playing hall,
from the very start of the game it was impossible to fight your way through to
the board. Public interest was also roused by the fact that the pairings for
the Candidates matches had not yet been made, and this game was considered to
be between two possible opponents in the semi-final or final. Korchnoi himself
had also added fuel to the fire, by declaring to journalists that he would
'show this boy how to play chess'.} 1. d4 {My opponent advanced his pawn so
resolutely that it became clear: he had only one aim - to win!} Nf6 2. c4 g6 {
Of course, my favourite King's Indian!} 3. g3 Bg7 {(3)} ({The immediate} 3...
c5 {is also possible (Game No.25 in 'Kasparov vs. Karpov 1986-1987').}) 4. Bg2
c5 {Without hesitation changing tune: the set-up with the fianchetto of the
light-square bishop, which is not very pleasant for Black in the classical
King's Indian, is less effective against the Modern Benoni.} 5. d5 {(10) The
main reply.} (5. Nf3 cxd4 6. Nxd4 {is more cautious, as Ribli played against
me in the 8th round (later I also tried the more original 5...Qa5+!? - Game No.
27 in 'Kasparov vs. Karpov 1986-1987'). But in this game Korchnoi has no
intention of avoiding any crucial disputes!}) 5... d6 {(2)} 6. Nc3 ({In the
event of} 6. Nf3 -- ({, in order after} 6... O-O 7. O-O e6 {to reply with the
advantageous} 8. dxe6 Bxe6 9. Ng5 Bxc4 10. Bxb7 Nbd7 11. Na3 $1 {- earlier
Korchnoi played this against Velimirovic (Sukhumi 1966) and Bouaziz (Sousse
Interzonal 1967)}) ({, various lines of the Benko Gambit are possible:} 6... b5
7. cxb5 a6 (7... Qa5+ $5 8. Nfd2 Qxb5 {, Korchnoi-Fischer, Curaçao Candidates
1962}) 8. bxa6 O-O 9. Nc3 Bxa6 10. O-O Nbd7 {(Korchnoi-Quinteros, Leningrad
Interzonal 1973)}) ({, or} 6... O-O 7. O-O b5 8. cxb5 a6 9. bxa6 Bf5 $5 {
(Nikolic-Kasparov, 2nd match game (rapid), Paris 1994).})) 6... O-O 7. Nf3 {(4)
} e6 {(2)} 8. O-O ({Now the variation} 8. dxe6 Bxe6 9. Ng5 Bxc4 10. Bxb7 Nbd7
11. Bxa8 Qxa8 12. O-O d5 {gives Black excellent compensation for the exchange,
as has been known since the time of the game Korchnoi-Scherbakov (Poltava 1956)
.}) 8... exd5 9. cxd5 {At last the game has entered the normal lines of the
Modern Benoni.} a6 {(6)} 10. a4 Re8 {(2) At that time I did not give any
particular thought to the order in which to make the moves which are essential
for this set-up.} 11. Nd2 {Korchnoi confidently follows the main line.} ({If} 
11. Bf4 {Black usually played} Ne4 12. Nxe4 Rxe4 13. Nd2 Rb4 {, and if} 14. Ne4
{, then} h6 {(Savon-Tal, Dnepropetrovsk 1970), but now the sharp gambit 14
b3!? has been revived (Hausner-Sikora, Czechoslovakia 1982; Aronian-Carlsen,
7th match game, Elista 2007).}) 11... Nbd7 12. h3 {(3)} Rb8 {(2)} 13. Nc4 {The
critical position of the variation.} Ne5 $5 {(16)} ({The plan with} 13... Nb6
14. Na3 Bd7 {, which Magerramov and I had studied before the Olympiad, is
safer, for example:} 15. a5 ({or} 15. e4 Nc8 16. Qd3 Qc7 17. Be3 Na7 18. Rfc1
b5 19. b4 c4 20. Qe2 bxa4 {(Korchnoi-Franco, Lucerne Olympiad 1982, 2nd round)}
) 15... Nc8 16. Nc4 Bb5 17. Qb3 Bxc4 18. Qxc4 Nd7 19. e4 Qc7 20. Be3 Na7 21.
Rfc1 b5 22. b4 bxc4 {, in both cases with a complicated battle. But after some
thought I chose a more risky but also more ambitious continuation, demanding
intensive calculating work by both players.}) 14. Na3 Nh5 {Intending by ...f7-f5 to neutralise the opponent's pawn majority in the centre. Therefore
White cannot afford to delay.} 15. e4 {(8)} ({Very few players are willing to
accept the piece sacrifice in the variations} 15. f4 Nxg3 $1 16. fxe5 Bxe5 {
(Donner-Ree, Amsterdam 1979)}) ({or} 15. g4 Qh4 $1 16. Ne4 h6 $1 17. gxh5 Bxh3
{(Kakageldyev-Tseshkovsky, Ashkhabad 1978).}) 15... Rf8 {(20) A comparatively
fresh idea of Timman's.} ({From the early 1970s attention focused on the
complications after} 15... f5 16. exf5 Bxf5 17. g4 Bxg4 18. hxg4 Qh4 19. gxh5
Rf8 $1 20. h6 Bh8 {, for example:} 21. -- (21. Ne4 Ng4 22. Qxg4 Qxg4 23. Nc4
Rbe8 {(Marovic-Kapengut, Yerevan 1971)} ({or} 23... b5 $5 {(Kivlan-Petkevich,
Riga 1974).})) ({. Then a problem-like idea on the theme of diversion brought
White success -} 21. Nc4 $5 Ng4 {(there is nothing else)} 22. Qxg4 Qxg4 23.
Nxd6 Be5 24. Nde4 Rf3 {with the idea of ...Rh3-h2;} (24... Rbe8 $5) 25. Ng5 (
25. Be3 Rbf8 $1) 25... Rbf8 $2 ({but after} 25... Rf5 {(Stohl)}) ({or} 25...
Rd3 {Black's queen is no weaker than the three minor pieces}) 26. Nxf3 Rxf3 27.
Re1 {(Kovacevic-Nemet, Karlovac 1979).})) ({In Moscow, after the Olympiad,
Nikitin and I also analysed the new, audacious move} 15... Bd7 $5 {,
transforming the knight on e5 into a kamikaze (the source game: Hulak-Nunn,
Toluca Interzonal 1982; a recent example: Aronian-Grischuk, Monte Carlo (rapid)
2011).}) ({The return move} 15... Rf8 {also looks audacious: Black calmly
prepares ...f7-f5, not paying any attention to his opponent's plans. But the
attempt to refute this immediately does not prevent the development of
counterplay:} 16. g4 $6 ({or} 16. Be3 $6 f5 17. exf5 Bxf5 18. g4 $2 Bxg4 $1 19.
hxg4 Qh4 $1 {and wins}) 16... Qh4 17. gxh5 Bxh3 18. h6 Bh8 19. Qe2 (19. Ne2 $2
f5 $1 {, Scheeren-Timman, Leeuwarden 1980}) 19... f5 20. Nc2 Rbe8 {with an
attack compensating for the piece deficit (Timman).}) 16. Kh2 {(10) White is
all ready to play f2-f4, but what can Black do? There would already appear to
be no way back and only one remains - forward...} f5 $2 {(15) Consistent -
but premature! I had seen this move in the most recent 'Informator', Volume 33,
but I did not have time to check it carefully.} ({At the board I intuitively
considered} 16... Bd7 {to be acceptable, and if} 17. f4 {, then} b5 $1 {with
very sharp play. Later it transpired that all this had already been played in
a little-known game from the West German Correspondence Championship (1980).
True, after} 18. fxe5 {Black overlooked his main trump -} Nxg3 $1 19. Kxg3
Bxe5+ 20. Kf3 (20. Kf2 Qh4+ 21. Kg1 ({or} 21. Ke2 b4 {is no better}) 21... Bxh3
) 20... b4 {, regaining one piece and obtaining quite sufficient compensation
for the second one. --- Even so, after some hesitation I decided to make an
'unclear' move, which was suggested by Timman in 'Informator' Volume 30 and
had occurred in two recent games. Alas, after this life for Black becomes
significantly more complicated.}) 17. f4 {This way, since now the retreat of
the knight loses - 17...Nf7? 18 exf5!. But here common sense is forced to
leave the stage, creating scope for flights of fantasy.} b5 $1 {An
instantaneous reply.} ({In 'Informator' Alburt recommended} 17... Bd7 {,
retaining the tension on the queenside, but after} 18. exf5 Bxf5 19. fxe5 Nxg3
$5 (19... Bxe5 20. Bf4 $1) 20. Rf3 $1 Nh5 (20... Bxe5 21. Nc4 $1) 21. exd6 Be5+
22. Kg1 Qh4 23. Be3 {Black's attack peters out.}) 18. axb5 $1 {(12)} ({The
acceptance of the piece sacrifice would have suited Black very well:} 18. fxe5
$6 Nxg3 $1 19. Kxg3 Bxe5+ 20. Kf2 {, and in the event of} Qh4+ $6 21. Kg1 Qg3
22. Rf3 $1 Qh2+ 23. Kf1 $2 ({But after} 23. Kf2 $1 {the advantage is on his
side:} -- ({, the 'reckless'} 23... Bd7 {(?), recommended by Arnason and me,
is bad in view of} 24. Qh1 $1) ({, as is} 23... Bd4+ $2 24. Qxd4 $1 cxd4 25.
Bf4 $1 fxe4 26. Bxh2 exf3 {(Arnason)} 27. Bf1 $1 ({but not the earlier move} 
27. Bxd6 $2 {because of} fxg2+ $1 28. Bxf8 dxc3 {with drawing chances})) ({,
and} 23... b4 {the most resilient, is also insufficient in view of} 24. Qh1 $1)
) 23... Bd7 $1 {(Birnboim-Arnason, Randers 1982) White is forced to seek
salvation with the only move} 24. Bh6 $1 {. However, the immediate 20...b4!
is correct, regaining one of the knights and retaining excellent counterplay.})
18... axb5 19. Naxb5 {(6)} ({For the moment Korchnoi is equal to the occasion:
again he would have sold his advantage much too cheaply by prematurely
capturing the doomed knight -} 19. fxe5 $6 Nxg3 $1 {(van Wely-Timman, Wijk aan
Zee 2002).}) 19... fxe4 {(2) Again White is at the cross-roads.} 20. Bxe4 $1 {
(31) After a long think Korchnoi makes a new, simple and strong move.} (20.
fxe5 $6 {would have been parried by the simple} Bxe5 ({here} 20... Nxg3 $2 {is
bad because of} 21. Rxf8+ Qxf8 22. e6 $1) 21. Rxf8+ (21. Bf4 $2 Rxf4 $1) 21...
Qxf8 22. Qf1 Bxg3+ 23. Kg1 Bf5 {with sufficient counterplay.}) ({However,
White had two other tempting continuations:} 20. Nxd6 $5 {(during the game I
was afraid of this temporary knight sacrifice)} Nxg3 ({in 'The Test of Time' I
recommended} 20... Qxd6 21. Nxe4 Qb6 22. fxe5 Rxf1 23. Qxf1 Bxe5 {, but after}
24. Qc4 $1 {Black has problems}) 21. Kxg3 Qxd6 22. Nxe4 Qb6 {'with unclear
play' - this, my Informator recommendation, is correct only after} 23. d6 ({
but not} 23. fxe5 $2 Bxe5+ 24. Kh4 Rxf1 $1 25. Qxf1 h6 $3 26. Bxh6 Qd8+ 27. Bg5
Qc7 $1 {and wins}) ({whereas after} 23. Be3 $1 Nd7 24. Rf2 {White seizes the
initiative, while keeping his extra pawn (although the insecure position of
his king leaves Black with some counter-chances)}) 23... Nf7 24. d7 Bb7 {.}) (
20. Na7 $5 {, aiming at the c6-square.} -- ({. The game Alburt-H.Olafsson 
(Reykjavik 1982), published in 'Informator' Volume 33, brought White success
after} 20... e3 $2 21. Qe2 ({but} 21. Nc6 $1 Nxc6 22. dxc6 {was even stronger,
winning}) 21... Nxg3 $6 22. Kxg3 {.}) ({. Commenting on that game R.Byrne and
Mednis also condemned the more resilient} 20... Nf3+ 21. Bxf3 exf3 22. Nc6 Qd7
{in view of} 23. f5 {(?!)} ({on the other hand, my later discovery} 23. g4 $1
Rb7 24. Rxf3 Nf6 25. Re3 {gives him an obvious advantage}) 23... Rb7 24. g4 {
, but in this case after} Nf6 25. Qxf3 gxf5 26. gxf5 Kh8 {White's extra pawn
is hardly felt.})) 20... Bd7 $1 {(37) Not only leaving the knight at e5 en
prise, but also sacrificing the mainstay of the position - the d6-pawn!} 21.
Qe2 $6 {(18) Temporarily maintaining the knight on b5.} ({Little was promised
by either} 21. Nxd6 $6 Qf6 $1 ({my earlier recommendation} 21... Rb6 {is less
good on account of the far from obvious reply} 22. Bg2 $1) 22. Bg2 (22. Ra6 Nc4
$1) 22... Nxg3 $1 23. Kxg3 Qxd6 24. Ne4 Qb6 {with double-edged play}) ({or} 21.
Na3 $6 Bc8 $1 ({the modest} 21... Nf7 22. Nc4 Rb4 $6 23. Bd3 $1 {favours White}
) 22. fxe5 Bxe5 23. Rxf8+ Qxf8 {with sufficient compensation for the piece.}) (
{But} 21. Na7 $1 {was strong, although I condemned it because of} Ra8 {, when
'it is not easy for White to escape from the pin'. In fact he can escape from
it by} 22. Ra2 $1 {(Stohl), when Black has problems:} Nc4 $2 ({or} 22... Qe8
23. Re1 $1 (23. Bg2 $5) 23... Qf7 24. Bg2 $1 {with the threat of fxe5, and if}
Nc4 25. Qb3 $1) 23. Nc6 $1 Qb6 24. Na4 Qb7 (24... Qc7 25. Qb3) 25. Bd3 Na5 26.
Nxc5 {and wins. --- Korchnoi's solid but slow move allows Black something of a
respite.}) 21... Qb6 $5 {(13)} 22. Na3 $1 ({Now} 22. Na7 $2 {no longer hits
the target:} Ra8 $1 23. Qa6 Qxa6 24. Rxa6 g5 $1 {etc.}) 22... Rbe8 $1 {(2) 
Another critical position. --- The intensity of the battle is approaching its
height, and the quality of the next two or three moves will decide the fate of
the game. The difficulty for White lies mainly in choosing from the mass of
available possibilities - it is not clear which of them is best. In addition,
the lack of time for thought was beginning to be felt... --- It is said that
the English grandmaster Keene, on entering the playing hall and seeing this
position on a monitor, decided that it was Black to move, and he declared that
Kasparov faced a very difficult defence, since the white knight would
inevitably go to c4. But on suddenly realising that it was White to move, he
began reassessing the position! Yes, White seems to have an obvious advantage,
but everywhere Black has some counterplay, enabling him to confuse matters.}
23. Bd2 $6 {(14) By giving up the b2-pawn, Korchnoi loses the remainder of
his advantage! After the game he was to say: 'Playing such complicated
positions against Kasparov is exceptionally difficult - all the time you have
to find the only moves'.} (23. g4 $2 {was more than dubious in view of} Qd8 $1
24. Kg2 (24. gxh5 Qh4 $1) ({also} 24. g5 Nf7 $1 {does not help}) 24... Nxg4 $1
25. hxg4 Qh4 26. Nab5 Bd4 {and wins.}) ({And after} 23. Be3 $6 Qb4 $1 {with
the threat of ...Nf7 the insecure placing of the bishops on the e-file is felt.
}) ({Again nothing is given by the capture of the knight:} 23. fxe5 $6 Bxe5 24.
Rxf8+ ({after} 24. Bf4 $2 Nxf4 25. gxf4 Bxf4+ 26. Kg2 Qd8 $1 {and ...Qg5+
White has no defence}) 24... Rxf8 25. Nc4 Bxg3+ 26. Kg1 Qd8 27. Bf3 Bxh3 {with
approximate equality - say,} 28. Ne4 Nf4 29. Bxf4 Bxf4 30. Qe1 Qe7 31. Bg2 Bf5
{etc.}) ({However, the queen should have been moved out of range of the rook -
} 23. Qg2 $1 {. This move, shown to me immediately after the game by Vaganian,
was for many years considered a confirmation of White's obvious advantage:} --
(23... Nf7 {(an admission of failure)} 24. g4 Nf6 25. Nc4 {and Bd3}) ({, or} 
23... Qb4 24. Nc2 Qb8 25. Ne3 Nf7 26. g4 Nf6 27. Bd3 {and Nc4 with a sound
extra pawn.}) (23... Qd8 $6 24. Bd2 $1 {.}) ({. But the modern computer claims
that after} 23... Qb3 $1 {all is not so simple:} 24. -- ({, after} 24. fxe5
Rxf1 25. Qxf1 Bxe5 26. Qc4 Qb4 $1) ({, or} 24. g4 Nf6 25. Bc2 (25. fxe5 Nxe4 {
and ...Bxe5+}) 25... Qb4 $1 26. Kh1 Nexg4 $1 27. hxg4 Nxg4 28. Bd3 (28. Ne4 g5
$1) 28... Bf5 29. Nc2 Qb7 {Black retains compensation for the piece}) ({, and
in the event of} 24. Bc2 Qb4 25. Bd2 (25. Ne4 $5) 25... Nc4 26. Nxc4 Qxc4 {
Sloth-Sterud, correspondence 1984)}) (24. Bb1 $5 Rb8 (24... c4 $6 25. Ba2 $1)
25. Bc2 Qb4 26. Ne4 Nf7 {- some compensation for the pawn.}))) 23... Qxb2 $1 {
(7) The long-awaited turning point! --- The queen fearlessly rushes into the
thick of the opponent's pieces, knowing that in the event of 24 Rfb1? the
doomed knight will land a decisive blow - 24...Nf3+!. Apparently this little
variation, which Korchnoi had overlooked, exhausted his patience...} 24. fxe5
$4 {(4) At the most inappropriate moment! Now the energy stored in the black
pieces breaks out, sowing death and destruction in the enemy camp.} ({
Meanwhile White had more than one safe continuation:} 24. Ra2 -- (24... Qb4 25.
Rb1 Qd4 {, and it is safest to go into an equal endgame:} 26. Nab5 Bxb5 27.
Nxb5 Qc4 28. Qxc4 Nxc4 29. Bf3 {.}) ({. Dreaming of victory, in 'The Test of
Time' I recommended} 24... Qb8 {, since again} 25. fxe5 $6 ({while after} 25.
Qg2 Nf7 {'Black has the advantage - the white pieces do not have any strong
points'. But this is an over-optimistic assessment: after} 26. Rb1 Qc8 27. Nab5
{White has at least equal chances}) 25... Rxf1 {, is unproductive after} 26.
Qxf1 (26. e6 $2 Ref8 $1) 26... Bxe5 27. Qd3 {(Stohl's move, with the idea of
27...Nxg3?! 28 Nc4!)} Bxg3+ $1 28. Kg1 Qd8 (28... Be5 $5) 29. Bxg6 Qf6 $1 {
with equality.})) (24. Nc2 $5 Qb7 $1 {(great resourcefulness is required)} 25.
Rab1 Qc8 26. fxe5 $1 {(at last!)} Rxf1 27. Qxf1 Bxe5 $1 (27... Nxg3 $5 28. Kxg3
Bxe5+ 29. Bf4 Rf8 30. Ne2 g5 {is also interesting}) 28. Ne2 Qa6 29. Qf3 Bf5 $1
30. Bxf5 (30. Rf1 Bf6 $1) 30... Qxe2+ 31. Qxe2 Bxg3+ 32. Kh1 Rxe2 33. Be6+ Kg7
34. Rb7+ Kf6 35. Bc3+ Kg5 36. Ne3 Rxe3 37. Bd2 Bf4 38. Bxe3 Bxe3 {with a drawn
endgame}) (24. Qg2 $1 {, practically forcing} Nf3+ 25. Bxf3 Bxc3 26. Nc4 Qb4
27. Bxc3 Qxc4 {, when after} 28. Rac1 {White has two active bishops and a
comfortable position.}) 24... Bxe5 {(the g3-point is under more pressure than
ever!)} 25. Nc4 {(17)} Nxg3 {A good move;} ({but there was also a more elegant
win, not noticed by the commentators -} 25... Rxf1 $5 26. Nxb2 Nxg3 $1 {, for
example:} 27. Rxf1 Nxe2+ 28. Kg2 Nxc3 29. Bf3 Na2 {etc.}) 26. Rxf8+ Rxf8 27.
Qe1 $5 {A desperate chance in a time scramble.} (27. Nxb2 Nxe2+ 28. Kg2 Bxc3 {
was too elementary.}) 27... Nxe4+ {(3)} 28. Kg2 Qc2 {(2)} ({It suddenly seemed
to me that the winning path had become more complicated, and I made a simple,
obvious move, overlooking the spectacular stroke} 28... Rf2+ $1 {, which would
have quickly decided the outcome:} 29. Kh1 Rh2+ 30. Kg1 Nxd2 $1 {with the
threat of} 31. -- Nf3+ 32. Kf1 Bxh3#) ({or} 28... Rf2+ 29. Qxf2 Bxh3+ $1 30.
Kf3 Bg4+ $1 (30... Nxd2+ 31. Qxd2 Qxa1 {, given in 'The Test of Time', is also
sufficient}) 31. Kg2 Qxa1 {, and if} 32. Nxe4 {, then} Bh3+ $1 33. Kf3 Qd1+ {
, mating (Stohl).}) 29. Nxe5 ({Again avoiding the obvious} 29. Qxe4 Qxe4+ 30.
Nxe4 Bxa1 {.}) 29... Rf2+ $6 {The blinding proximity of victory... That which
was good on the previous move now turns out to be inaccurate.} ({Black would
have won easily by both} 29... Bxh3+ $1 30. Kxh3 Nxd2 {(White has to lose one
of his knights)}) ({and} 29... Nxd2 $1 {(I saw this, but I thought that the
rook check was even better)} 30. Rc1 ({or} 30. Nxd7 Nf3+ 31. Qe2 Nh4+ $1 32.
Kg1 (32. Kh2 Rf2+) 32... Qxc3 {etc.}) 30... Nf3+ 31. Rxc2 Nxe1+ {.}) 30. Qxf2
$6 {(5) Previously an exclamation mark was attached to this move, but this
was wrong.} (30. Kg1 $1 {was more resilient. The variation which I hastily
calculated at the board looked convincing -} Rxd2 $1 31. Qxe4 (31. Nxe4 $2 Rg2+
{leads to mate}) 31... Qxc3 {(?!)} ({the cool-headed} 31... dxe5 $1 {(instead
of 31...Qxc3)} 32. Qxe5 Qf5 33. Qxf5 Bxf5 {would nevertheless have given Black
a technically won endgame}) 32. Ra8+ Kg7 {. Stohl confirmed the win for Black
after} 33. Nf3 $1 Rd1+ $1 (33... Qc1+ 34. Ne1 Rxd5 35. Qe7+ {with perpetual
check}) 34. Kg2 {(?!)} ({but} 34. Kh2 $1 {is better, in order after} Qf6 ({and
if} 34... Qb2+ $1 35. Kg3 Qf6 36. Ra7 Qf7 {there is the splendid resource} 37.
Qc2 Rxd5 38. h4 $3 {, when it is very difficult for Black to destroy the
domination of the white pieces and convert his material advantage}) 35. Ra7 Qf7
{to force a draw by} 36. Qh4 $1 h6 37. Qd8) 34... Qf6 35. Ra7 Qf7 {
(threatening ...Bxh3+), although even here things are not completely clear
after} 36. Kg3 $1 {. --- The game enters its concluding, most gripping stage.
Each player had roughly five minutes left on the clock.}) 30... Nxf2 $1 {
Hurrah for intuition!} ({Some kind of sixth sense forced me to reject the
plausible} 30... Bxh3+ $2 31. Kg1 $1 Nxf2 {because of} 32. Ra2 $1 {, and later
analysis confirmed my fears:} Qb3 {(the only chance of playing for a win)} 33.
Ra8+ Kg7 34. Ra7+ Kf6 $5 ({avoiding the draw after} 34... Kg8) ({and not
blundering into} 34... Kf8 $4 35. Bh6+ Ke8 36. Ra8+ Ke7 37. Bg5#) 35. Nf3 $1 {
and the seemingly helpless white pieces unexpectedly create mating threats. In
addition the knight on f2 is en prise, and in the event of} Nd3 $2 ({Black was
not obliged to lose, but after the approximate} 35... g5 36. Kxf2 Qc2 37. Kg3 (
{or} 37. Ne2 {he would also not have had any serious winning chances})) 36.
Ne4+ $1 {(disaster strikes from the other side)} (36. Bg5+ Kf5 37. Rf7+ Kg4 38.
Rf4+ Kh5 ({or} 38... Kg3 39. Ne2#) 39. Rh4#) 36... Kf5 37. Nxd6+ Kg4 38. Nh2+
Kh4 39. Rxh7+ Kg3 40. Ne4# {mate! In 'The Test of Time' I gave this résumé:
'In the time scramble the game could have ended this way, but then it is
unlikely that this commentary would have been written...'}) 31. Ra2 $1 {I had
overlooked this defence and so I became extremely agitated. But even so,
sensing that 31...Bxh3+? 32 Kg1! was weak (as on the 30th move), I made the
only winning move.} Qf5 $1 {Petrosian: 'I would also not have moved my bishop
off the 7th rank, where it was performing the role of a block in the path of
the white rook. In a time scramble the safety of the king is more precious
than gain of material'.} 32. Nxd7 Nd3 $2 {None of the commentators noticed
that this was a time-trouble blunder!} ({The only way to win was} 32... Nxh3 $1
33. Ra8+ Kg7 34. Ra7 g5 $1 {(the computer is not afraid of discovered checks)}
35. Nxc5+ Kg6 {, when White would not succeed in coordinating his pieces:} 36.
N5e4 (36. Ne6 g4 $2 37. Be1 Qf3+ 38. Kh2 h6 $1 39. Rg7+ Kh5 40. Rg8 Nf2 {and
wins}) 36... Qg4+ $1 37. Ng3 (37. Kh2 Qg1+ 38. Kxh3 g4+ 39. Kh4 Qg2 $1 {etc.})
37... Nf4+ 38. Kf2 Nd3+ 39. Kg2 Qd4 $1 {.}) 33. Bh6 $2 {Time, time...} (33.
Ra8+ $1 Kg7 34. Ra7 $1 {was essential, setting up an ambush and prettily
forcing a draw:} Qf2+ 35. Kh1 Qxd2 (35... c4 36. Nc5+ $1) 36. Ne5+ $1 Kf8 (
36... Kh6 $2 37. Ng4+ Kg5 38. Ne4+) 37. Ra8+ Ke7 38. Ra7+ Kd8 39. Ra8+ $1 ({
but not} 39. Nf7+ $2 Kc8 $1 40. Nxd6+ Kb8 41. Rb7+ Ka8 42. Ncb5 Nf2+ $1 43. Kg1
Nxh3+ 44. Kh1 Qxd5+ 45. Kh2 Qxb7 {, destroying the mating construction and
winning}) {, and since} 39... Kc7 $2 40. Nb5+ Kb7 41. Ra7+ Kb6 42. Nc4+ {is
bad for Black, he is forced to return with his king - 39...Ke7 and allow 40
Ra7+ with perpetual check. --- Yes, in such games it is rarely possible to
avoid mutual mistakes. Immediately after the game I admitted: 'The tension was
so great that by the fifth hour of play my eyes were dazzled, and at times it
seemed that the pieces were shaking, although I love sharp chess of this sort.
I can imagine how tired my opponent must have been...'}) 33... Qxd7 34. Ra8+
Kf7 35. Rh8 $6 (35. Ne4 {, restricting the black king's mobility, was more
resilient.} -- ({. At the board I imagined all sorts of horrors, and so I was
intending to open an escape square for my king with} 35... g5 $1 {. This
position proved so interesting, that while still at the Olympiad Igor Zaitsev
and I made a thorough analysis of it:} 36. Rf8+ (36. Bxg5 h6 ({or} 36... Nb4 $1
)) 36... Ke7 37. Rh8 (37. Re8+ Kxe8 $1) 37... Nf4+ $1 (37... Qf5 $4 38. Bxg5+
Kd7 39. Rxh7+ $1 {, winning the queen}) 38. Kf2 Nxh3+ 39. Kg3 Qf5 (39... Qa4
40. Rxh7+ Kd8 $1 {is also good}) 40. Bf8+ $1 Kd8 $1 ({not} 40... Kd7 $2 41.
Rxh7+ $1 Kd8 42. Be7+ Kc7 43. Bxd6+ Kc8 44. Rc7+ $1 Kd8 45. Nxc5 {, forcing}
Qf2+ {with a draw}) 41. Bxd6+ Kd7 42. Rxh7+ $1 Qxh7 $1 43. Nf6+ Kxd6 44. Nxh7
c4 ({or} 44... Kxd5 {with a won knight endgame})) ({. The analysis contained a
number of other branches, but the simple move} 35... Qe7 {, pointed out in
Moscow by Nikitin, made all these subtleties unnecessary:} 36. Ng5+ ({as is
the knight ending after} 36. Rf8+ Qxf8 37. Ng5+ ({or} 37. Bxf8 Kxf8 38. Nxd6
Nf4+ 39. Kf3 Nxd5 40. Ke4 Nb6) 37... Ke8 38. Bxf8 Kxf8 39. Nxh7+ Kg7 40. Ng5
Kf6) 36... Kf6 37. Rf8+ Ke5 38. Rf7 Qe8 {is hopeless for White. --- Initially
the unexpected rook thrust to h8 put me into a slight panic: for an instant it
appeared that Black had no good reply. But by the method of elimination I
quickly found a move which not only did not lose, but also won!})) 35... Kf6 $1
{The king breaks free, and now White has nothing to hope for. For the first
time in the game I could breath freely - all the fears and dangers (apart from
time-trouble!) were now behind me...} 36. Kf3 $2 {A blunder with the flag
about to fall: it would appear that Korchnoi could no longer see the board.}
Qxh3+ {. And White lost on time, without managing to resign. --- Times: 2.30-2.28.} (36... -- {At that moment the spectators and players tightly surrounding
our board gave us a genuine ovation. It need hardly be said that this
ultra-tense game appeared in chess publications around the world. Nikitin:
'The Korchnoi-Kasparov duel went down in the history of the Olympiads as one
of the most dramatic battles, alongside such unforgettable clashes as
Fischer-Tal (1960) and Spassky-Fischer (1970). In the end it was this stunning
win by the Baku player that deprived Karpov of another chess "Oscar" - the
prestigious annual journalists' prize, which he had already become accustomed
to receiving.' --- The well-known photographer Dmitry Donskoy, who was present
at this match, informed me a few days later that he had spoken to many
journalists from various countries and he already realised to whom the 'Oscar'
for 1982 would be awarded. Of course, it was not only my win against Korchnoi
that was taken into account, but also my results in Bugojno, the Interzonal in
Moscow and the Olympiad in Lucerne, where towards the end I won against Suba
and drew with Andersson (an overall score of +19 =18, without any losses). And
if I had also managed to defeat the third defector - the leader of the
Canadian team Igor Ivanov, then, as my colleagues joked, 'Moscow would also
have awarded Dzerzhinsky's personal revolver.'}) (36... -- {As for the outcome
of the Olympiad, the USSR team achieved its best result in recent years,
finishing 6½ points ahead of the second prize-winners! Karpov performed
confidently on board 1, while on board 2 I brought the team the greatest
number of points. Nikitin: 'The names of Karpov and Kasparov were always
adjacent both in the rating list, and in the Soviet team list. At the Olympiad
both endeavoured not to fall behind the other, and this competition of the
leaders was to the benefit of the team. As it was wittily remarked at the time,
the chess ship "USSR" had acquired a powerful KarKas.' (Karkas - from Russian
this would be translated as 'hull' - translator's note) --- There was a very
tough battle for second place between the teams from USA, Yugoslavia and
Czechoslovakia. More confident play in the last few matches enabled the Czech
players to repeat a success of half a century (!) earlier, by winning the
silver medals. This was as much a surprise as the failure of the Hungarian
team, who on this occasion played a secondary role.}) (36... -- {Towards the
end of the Olympiad the FIDE Congress was held, and there an event occurred
which was to have far-reaching consequences for the chess world. With the
support of the USSR, the Soviet bloc and countries of the Third World, the
person elected as FIDE President was the Filipino Florencio Campomanes - a man
with dictatorial ways, who looked down on chess players. It became possible
for small countries to dictate matters, without being restrained by the right
of veto, or by the Security Council, as in the United Nations. During the
times of representatives of the democratic world, such as the Dutchman Max
Euwe or the Icelander Fridrik Olafsson, things were better in FIDE, since
these presidents did not endeavour to rise above chess: they played the role
of intermediary between opposing sides and always took into account the
interests of chess players. In difficult, sometimes deadlocked situations,
both presidents displayed, in the name of chess, both firmness and flexibility,
and above all - objectivity. But the new FIDE leadership began to disregard
grandmasters - after all, they didn't (and still don't) even have the right to
vote! --- I remember one episode, which struck me as being highly symbolic.
After the counting of the votes, but before the declaration of the results,
the chairman was handed a note, and he read out in a sombre voice: 'It is with
great regret that I announce the death of President Brezhnev. I would ask you
all to stand and observe a minute's silence in his memory.' After this, in
deathly silence, Campomanes's victory was announced. It appeared that the
chess world was mourning not Brezhnev's death, but its own future... In this
strange way Campomanes's election and Brezhnev's death became linked in my
memory. The former promised me problems in the chess world, while the latter
promised hopes of favourable changes in my country.}) (36... -- {The pairings
for the Candidates matches, held at the end of the Olympiad, did not turn out
very well for me. I sat with Beliavsky and with baited breath awaited the
results. However, the way that the draw was made was strange. Here is a list
of the pairings and the ratings of the players: Hübner (2630) - Smyslov (2565)
--- Ribli (2580) - Torre (2535) --- Kasparov (2675) - Beliavsky (2620) ---
Korchnoi (2635) - Portisch (2625)}) (36... -- {I considered my most dangerous
rivals to be Beliavsky and Korchnoi, and here I was faced with playing both of
them in succession! Why? Because after the pairings had been decided, it was
simply announced that the winner of the first pair would meet the winner of
the second, and the winner of the third would play the winner of the fourth 
(although it was quite obvious that the first two pairs were in general weaker
than the other two). Had lots been drawn, and if so, why was this done without
our participation? My immediate thought was that someone wanted to make it as
difficult as possible for me to qualify for a match with Karpov: after all, at
the start I could have lacked match experience. Beliavsky also looked
distressed - we were on good terms, and we were both hoping to avoid meeting
in the quarter-final, realising that this would be a severe test. And the
indignant Portisch left the hall, accusing those who had organised the
pairings of cheating: it was not just that he had been paired with Korchnoi -
if he won, he would have to play me or Beliavsky... --- This was how the 1982
'Oscar' year ended, a very important one for my development. Ahead lay the
Candidates matches.}) 0-1

[Event "?"]
[Site "?"]
[Date "????.??.??"]
[Round "?"]
[White "Match with Beliavsky"]
[Black "?"]
[Result "*"]
[Annotator "Garry Kasparov"]
[PlyCount "1"]
[EventDate "1984.??.??"]
[SourceDate "2012.12.08"]

{Quarter-final Candidates match Kasparov-Beliavsky (Moscow, 26th February-20th
March 1983) - 6-3.} 1. -- {This Moscow encounter with Alexander Beliavsky was
the first official match in my career. At that time the quarter-finals were
played to the best of 10 games, the semi-finals - 12 games, and the final - 16
games, and all with separate days for adjournments, so that they lasted
somewhat longer than present-day matches for the world championship! I had to
adapt urgently to the unfamiliar logic of match play, and the pre-match
preparation had to be especially thorough: for the first time I had to
consider my opening repertoire as applied to a single opponent. True, my
opponent probably experienced similar difficulties. --- I think that the most
important role in my ultimate success was in fact played by preparation, or,
more specifically, a more flexible approach to match strategy, mainly to the
solving of opening problems. In addition, I and my group of trainers (it
included Nikitin, Shakarov, Timoshchenko, Vladimirov, and in Moscow also
Chekhov) studied Beliavsky's games, and noted his strong and weak points. The
strong included his enormous capacity for work at the board, his brilliant
handling of familiar positions, and his exceptional tenacity. However, our
deficiencies are a continuation of our virtues: Beliavsky's adherence to his
own views often transformed into inflexibility, and his excellent knowledge of
certain set-ups gave rise to the desire to get by with the minimum of means in
the opening. On the basis of this, an attempt was made to plan, if only
roughly, the course of the match struggle.} (1. -- {We played in the
conference hall of the 22-storey Sport Hotel, situated on the part of Lenin
Prospect far from the centre. It was there, eighteen months earlier, that the
Interzonal Tournament was held, and that two years later the 48th game of my
first match with Karpov would be played, and Campomanes's notorious press
conference would be held (in 2004, 'in view of its dangerous condition', this
historic chess building was demolished). --- The pairings gave me the white
pieces in the first game. My trainers and I decided that I would play only 1
d4 and after 1...Nf6 2 c4 e6 allow the Nimzo-Indian Defence with 3 Nc3.
Against 3...Bb4 we had prepared the extremely risky Sämisch Variation - 4 a3!?.
After playing this against Beliavsky in the 1983 USSR Spartakiad, I soon
gained a promising position: my opponent was clearly not prepared for such a
turn of events. But in the match, on encountering the unexpected 3 Nc3 (I used
to play 3 Nf3 far more often), to simplify his preparation Beliavsky
concentrated on the Queen's Gambit - 3...d5, and all the odd-numbered games 
(apart from the last, the 9th) led to a 'Karlsbad' structure: 4 cxd5 exd5 5
Bg5 Be7 6 e3. This line came as a surprise to both of us - the exchange on the
4th move had not previously occurred in my games, while Beliavsky replied with
the rare set-up 6...h6 7 Bh4 b6.}) (1. -- {The battle in the 1st game went in
my favour, but I did not find the correct way of increasing the advantage
gained from the opening (cf. Game No.80, note to Black's 11th move), and by
the adjournment Beliavsky had succeeded in fully neutralising White's
initiative. On the resumption a draw was agreed on the 65th move. --- My
opponent arrived for the 2nd game with big hopes. It has to be said that,
because of our lack of match experience, we both overestimated the importance
of the white pieces, seriously reckoning that with White it was necessary to
play exclusively for a win. And this maximalism did Beliavsky a bad service 
(see the following game).}) *

[Event "79: Candidates Quarter-Final, Moscow"]
[Site "?"]
[Date "1983.03.01"]
[Round "2"]
[White "Beliavsky, A."]
[Black "Kasparov, G."]
[Result "0-1"]
[ECO "D34"]
[Annotator "Garry Kasparov"]
[PlyCount "74"]
[EventDate "1983.??.??"]
[Source "Everyman Chess"]
[SourceDate "2012.11.28"]

1. d4 {Beliavsky had also decided to use only this move in the match.} ({
Against} 1. e4 {I had prepared the Scheveningen -} c5 2. Nf3 e6 3. d4 cxd4 4.
Nxd4 Nf6 ({or the Sicilian 'hedgehog' -} 4... Nc6 5. Nb5 d6 6. c4 Nf6 {etc.})
5. Nc3 d6 {. But the main problem was the move 1 d4, which my opponent
frequently made. It was time to find something rather more solid than my usual
Modern Benoni and King's Indian (which, however, I successfully employed at a
decisive moment of the match - in the 8th game).}) 1... d5 2. c4 e6 3. Nc3 c5 {
Here is a surprise - the Tarrasch Defence! The idea of adopting it came under
the influence of Nikitin and my childhood memories of the book on the 1969
Petrosian-Spassky match. Since then the defence had gone out of fashion and by
1983 it was in the backwoods of theory and practice: of the leading
grandmasters, the only one to employ it regularly was Gligoric. But it turned
out that here no clear way for White to gain an opening advantage was
apparent! The weakness of the isolated d5-pawn did not concern me, since it
was compensated by dynamic piece play. And, beginning with this game and right
up to the match with Karpov, the Tarrasch Defence brought me truly fairy-tale
dividends (+5=6). --- My choice clearly stunned my opponent - on the first 14
well-known moves he spent one and a half (!) hours. This was not surprising:
Beliavsky had not yet encountered the 'Tarrasch' in practice, and he had to
play 'by sight'. But as a result he gave me an enormous time advantage, which
largely decided the outcome of the game.} 4. cxd5 exd5 5. Nf3 Nc6 6. g3 Nf6 7.
Bg2 Be7 8. O-O {(20)} O-O 9. Bg5 {(13) The main line.} ({Less is promised by} 
9. dxc5 Bxc5 10. Bg5 d4 {(Game No.63)}) (9. b3 Ne4 10. Bb2 Bf6 {
(Larsen-Kasparov, Niksic 1983)}) (9. Be3 c4 10. Ne5 h6 $1 {, as I played
against Larsen (Brussels 1987) and Hort (3rd match game, Cologne 1988).}) 9...
cxd4 ({The alternative is} 9... c4 10. Ne5 Be6 11. f4 Ng4 $1 ({but not} 11...
Nxe5 $2 12. fxe5 $1 Ne4 13. Bxe7 Nxc3 14. bxc3 Qxe7 15. e4 $1 Qd7 16. a4 {,
Kasparov-Hjorth, Dortmund 1980.})) 10. Nxd4 h6 11. Be3 {(6)} Re8 {(5)} ({Since
1969 this move has supplanted} 11... Bg4 12. Qa4 Na5 (12... Qd7 13. Bxd5 {is
not to everyone's taste}) 13. Rad1 Nc4 14. Bc1 Qc8 15. Qb5 $5 ({more accurate
than} 15. Qc2 Rd8 {, Petrosian-Spassky, 12th match game, Moscow 1969}) 15...
Nb6 16. Bf4 {with a small advantage to White (Kasparov-Palatnik, Moscow 1981).}
) 12. Qa4 {(23)} ({One of the most popular continuations at that time, along
with} 12. Rc1 Bf8 {(here} 13. Na4 $5 {is of current interest).}) ({In his
match with me, Korchnoi was to employ the novelty} 12. a3 {, Smyslov was to
follow suit (Game No.91)}) ({while Karpov, after extensive preparation, was to
play} 12. Qb3 {(Game Nos. 11, 13 in 'Kasparov vs. Karpov 1975-1985').}) ({But
in the 6th game Beliavsky revealed a new plan with} 12. Qc2 Bg4 13. Rfd1 {,
and I failed to find an effective antidote. Even so, after} Bf8 (13... Qd7 $1
14. Nb3 Rad8 {is more useful}) 14. Rac1 Rc8 (14... Qd7 15. Nb3 $1) 15. Nxc6 $6
({a premature exchange -} 15. Qa4 $1 {is stronger}) 15... bxc6 16. Bd4 (16.
Bxa7 $6 c5 $1) 16... Bb4 (16... a5 $1) 17. Rd2 ({and here} 17. Bxa7 $5 {
deserved consideration}) 17... Qe7 18. a3 Ba5 19. b4 $6 (19. e3 $1 Bb6 20. Na4
Bxd4 21. Rxd4 {was more cunning, with some advantage}) 19... Bb6 20. e3 Qe6 21.
Qb2 ({now if} 21. Na4 {there is the acceptable reply} Ne4 $1) 21... Bxd4 22.
Rxd4 (22. exd4 Nd7 $1) 22... c5 $1 {the chances became equal and on the 32nd
move peace was concluded.}) 12... Bd7 13. Rad1 {(24) The most natural move.} (
{Soon the stock of} 13. Rfd1 {also went up in the world - here in the event of}
Nb4 ({. Black tries both} 13... Na5 14. Qc2 Rc8 ({or} 14... Nc4 15. Nxd5 $1)
15. Nf5 $1) ({, and} 13... Bc5) 14. Qb3 a5 {not only} 15. a4 {is attractive,} (
{but also} 15. Nxd5 {.})) 13... Nb4 {(3)} 14. Qb3 a5 {Black holds on by
tactical means, threatening by ...a5-a4 to drive the queen from its active
position.} 15. Rd2 $5 {(11) A novelty, devised at the board.} ({White loses
the exchange after} 15. Nxd5 $2 Nbxd5 16. Bxd5 Nxd5 17. Qxd5 Bh3 {
(Vaganian-Ivkov, Odessa 1975).}) ({After this} 15. a4 {became the main move,
when the most interesting reply is} Rc8 16. Nc2 b5 $1 17. Nxb4 bxa4 18. Nxa4
Bxb4 19. Nc3 (19. Nb6 $2 Rxe3 $1 {, Korchnoi-Kasparov, Herzeg Novi (blitz) 1983
}) 19... Bxc3 20. bxc3 a4 {with good counterplay. But Beliavsky, convinced of
the need to make maximum use of the white pieces, decided to avoid the known
paths, in order to get me away from my home preparation. Previously 15 Rd2
seemed to me to be dubious, but now I consider it to be the best continuation.}
) 15... a4 {(15)} 16. Qd1 a3 {(3) Ensuring the safety of the knight on b4,
which is defending the isolated d5-pawn.} 17. Qb1 $6 {(7) Excessively modest;}
({as was the later} 17. bxa3 $6 Rxa3 {with equality.}) ({The return of the
queen to its abandoned post would have been far more unpleasant for Black -} 
17. Qb3 $1 {, for example:} axb2 ({or} 17... Qa5 18. bxa3 Qxa3 19. Nxd5 Nbxd5
20. Bxd5 Nxd5 21. Qxd5 {, also winning a pawn and forcing the opponent to
fight only for a draw}) 18. a3 $1 {(a move which is impossible in the
variation with 13 Rfd1)} Nc6 19. Nxd5 Na5 ({or} 19... Bxa3 20. Nc2 $1 Nxd5 21.
Bxd5 Qe7 22. Nxa3 Rxa3 23. Bxf7+ Qxf7 24. Qxa3 Ne5 {, regaining the exchange,
but remaining a pawn down}) 20. Qa2 {, followed by picking up the b2-pawn. ---
In the resulting unfamiliar situation it was now my time to have a proper
think...}) 17... Bf8 {(42)} 18. bxa3 (18. Nb3 {was no better:} Qc8 19. Rc1 Bf5
20. Qa1 axb2 21. Qxb2 Rxe3 $1 {(Kunin-Veinzettl, Oberwart 2006).}) 18... Rxa3
19. Qb2 (19. Ndb5 Rxe3 $1 20. fxe3 Qe8 {(b6) etc.}) 19... Qa8 {(5) Black has
deployed his pieces well, neutralising the weakness of the d5-pawn, and he is
ready for further simplification.} 20. Nb3 {This and the next move indicate
that Beliavsky was unable to readjust in good time and that he was continuing
to try and squeeze some plus from the white pieces.} ({The most sensible would
have been to exchange the knight on b4 by} 20. Nc2 $5 Nxc2 21. Rxc2 {, which
would most probably have led to a quick draw.}) 20... Bc6 {(5)} 21. Bd4 $6 {(8)
White does not yet sense the impending danger and he imperceptibly crosses the
boundary between an imaginary better position and a realistically slightly
worse one.} ({It would have been safer to play} 21. Ra1 {, and if} Ne4 {to
exchange the inactive bishop -} 22. Bxe4 $1 dxe4 23. Nd4 {, maintaining
equality without problems.}) 21... Ne4 22. Nxe4 ({Here too} 22. Bxe4 $5 dxe4
23. Be3 {was more solid, even with the loss of a tempo.}) 22... dxe4 {Little
by little Black has seized the initiative: his 'isolani' has been transformed
into a strong pawn, while White is beginning to be concerned by the weakness
of his a2-pawn.} 23. Ra1 ({If} 23. Nc1 {, then} Bd5 ({or} 23... b5 {is good.}))
({And in the event of} 23. Nc5 {some advantage is given by} e3 ({but} 23...
Nxa2 $5 24. Rc2 Ra5 $1 25. Ra1 Nb4 26. Rcc1 e3 $1 {is more energetic, for the
moment retaining both the extra pawn, and pressure}) 24. Bxc6 exf2+ 25. Bxf2
Nxc6 {.}) 23... Bd5 {(17)} 24. Qb1 {(13)} ({Here too after} 24. Nc5 $6 {White
has to reckon with} e3 $1 25. Bxd5 (25. Qxb4 $2 Bxg2 26. fxe3 b5 $1) 25... Nxd5
{.}) 24... b6 {(23)} ({Perhaps the immediate} 24... b5 $5 {was even better,
also opening the long diagonal for the queen and strengthening the threat of ...e4-e3.}) 25. e3 {(8) White is condemned to passive defence. Beliavsky
radically prevents ...e4-e3, but now the black pieces acquire an excellent
base on d3, for which the knight promptly aims.} Nd3 {Slightly hasty;} (25...
Bc4 $5 {.}) 26. Rd1 $6 {(5)} (26. Nc1 $1 Ne1 $1 {looks dangerous for White} 27.
-- ({, say,} 27. Qxb6 $2 Rb8 28. Qc7 Rc8 29. Qf4 ({or} 29. Qe5 Ra5 $1 30. Qf4
Nxg2 31. Kxg2 Be6 $1 32. Ne2 Be7 33. Nc3 f5 34. g4 Qc6 $1) 29... Qa5 $1 30. Rd1
Nxg2 31. Kxg2 Be6 $1 32. g4 Qb5 $1) ({. But he could have tried to hold out
after} 27. Ne2 Nf3+ 28. Bxf3 exf3 29. Nf4 Be4 30. Qxb6 Rb8 (30... Ra6 31. Qb3)
31. Qc7 Rc8 32. Qb6 (32. Qd7 Ra5 $1) 32... Rxa2 33. Rdxa2 Qxa2 34. Qb2 {.}))
26... b5 $1 {(6)} 27. Bf1 {(8) In an unpleasant position Beliavsky no longer
begrudges giving up his bishop, in order to get rid of the second annoying
knight.} ({The other way -} 27. Nc1 {was little better in view of} Nxc1 28.
Rxc1 b4 29. Rc2 Qa5 {and ...Ra8.}) 27... b4 {This pawn, securely defended by
the bishop, will soon become passed, since the a2-pawn is bound to fall.} 28.
Bxd3 $6 {This hastens the end;} ({as does} 28. Bb2 $6 Nxb2 29. Qxb2 Be7 {and ...Bf6.}) 28... exd3 29. Qxd3 Rxa2 30. Rxa2 {(2)} Qxa2 {Black has a technically
won position, although a certain accuracy is still demanded of him.} 31. Nc5
Bf3 {(2)} (31... b3 $1 {was more resolute:} 32. Rd2 Qa5 33. Bb2 Bc4 $1 34. Qd7
Rc8 $1 {and wins. In the opponent's desperate time-trouble I delayed slightly,
but did not throw away the win.}) 32. Ra1 (32. Rc1 Bxc5 $1 {and ...b4-b3.})
32... Qd5 33. Qb3 Qh5 34. Nd3 Bd6 (34... Be4 {(c6, b7)} 35. Ne1 Ra8 {was
simpler, combining an attack on the king along the long diagonal with the
threat of advancing the passed pawn.}) 35. Ne1 Bb7 {(3)} 36. Rc1 Qf5 {(5)} ({
Again not the highest quality move (} 36... Ra8 $1 {was better), but we both
realised that the game was about to end.}) 37. Rd1 Bf8 ({And White lost on
time, without managing to play} 37... Bf8 38. Qb1 {(after which there could
have followed} Qd5 39. f3 Ba6 {etc.). --- Times: 2.30-2.18.}) (37... -- {After
this unexpected win with Black in the very first game played with a new
opening, I became full of optimism and it could have been thought that
subsequently things would go easily and that success would follow of its own
accord. However, such matches always harbour unforeseen turns, especially for
debutants... --- In the 3rd game Beliavsky somewhat improved Black's play
compared with the 1st, and I made a poor response, which led to rapid
simplification and a draw (cf. Game No.80, note to White's 12th move). Before
the 4th game I was seized by fears and doubts: should I again play the
Tarrasch Defence? Analytically I was ready, but I did not yet have a deep
belief in it, and I was afraid that Beliavsky would devise 'something
terrible'. On the way to the game I nervously discussed this problem with
Valery Chekhov and just before going on to the stage I decided to employ
another opening - the Nimzo-Indian Defence, which we had not seriously
prepared. Such a 'tuning up' for the game quite predictably had dismal
consequences.}) (37... -- {Beliavsky, who the day before had been given a
drawing respite, played with enormous will-to-win, and the position reached
was more familiar to him than to me. He boldly sacrificed two pawns and
developed a dangerous attack. True, on the 19th move he delayed, and Black
could have successfully defended, but I missed this chance. The final part of
the game took place in a fierce time scramble, and my blunder on the 35th move
led to an immediate decision. Strangely enough, failures in the Nimzo-Indian
Defence with 4 e3 pursued me throughout my career: I also suffered memorable
defeats in games with Psakhis (49th USSR Championship, Frunze 1981), I.Sokolov
(Wijk aan Zee 1999), and Kramnik (10th match game, London 2000). --- The match
score became equal - 2-2, and the situation more complicated. Asriyan: 'After
losing the 4th game, Garik became nervous, and those around him had to make
considerable efforts to calm him down. Incidentally, he was phoned by Aliev,
who at that time was already working in Moscow and who also said a few
approving words, emphasising that he had no doubts that his compatriot would
win. And Botvinnik, as usual, was firm and laconic: "You are a man; don't be a
wimp, take yourself in hand!" Garik heeded this advice.'}) 0-1

[Event "80: Candidates Quarter-Final, Moscow"]
[Site "?"]
[Date "1983.03.09"]
[Round "5"]
[White "Kasparov, G."]
[Black "Beliavsky, A."]
[Result "1-0"]
[ECO "D58"]
[Annotator "Garry Kasparov"]
[PlyCount "76"]
[EventDate "1983.??.??"]
[Source "Everyman Chess"]
[SourceDate "2012.11.28"]

{In order to regain my composure and prepare properly for the 5th game, I took
a time-out - not an easy decision, since the players were each allotted only
one time-out for the entire match. Knowing Beliavsky's convictions, I was in
no doubt that he would repeat the specific variation of the 'Karlsbad' from
the 1st and 3rd games (especially since in it he had gained a draw quite
easily), and I prepared a strong novelty.} 1. d4 d5 2. c4 e6 3. Nc3 Nf6 4. cxd5
({Before the match I had played} 4. Bg5) ({or} 4. Nf3 {- Game Nos. 41, 54.})
4... exd5 5. Bg5 Be7 6. e3 h6 7. Bh4 O-O 8. Bd3 b6 9. Nf3 Bb7 10. O-O c5 $6 ({
After} 10... Nbd7 11. Qc2 c5 12. Rad1 {White has merely a minimal advantage 
(an example: Kasparov-Georgadze, 46th USSR Championship, Tbilisi 1978), but
Beliavsky believed that he would be able to equalise, even after allowing the
white knight to go to e5.}) ({In the 7th game he did this by} 10... Ne4 11.
Bxe7 Qxe7 12. Ne5 $5 Nd7 13. f4 Nxe5 $1 14. fxe5 c5 15. Qe1 Rad8 16. Rd1 Qg5 {
etc.}) 11. Ne5 $1 {The most surprising thing is that at that time this
position was not yet considered in the popular Yugoslav 'Encyclopaedia of
Chess Openings'.} Nbd7 ({In the first game after} 11... Nc6 $6 12. Ba6 $1 Qc8
13. Bxb7 Qxb7 14. Bxf6 Bxf6 15. Ng4 Bd8 16. Nxd5 Nxd4 17. Ndf6+ $1 Bxf6 18.
Nxf6+ gxf6 19. exd4 {Black suffered because of his hopelessly spoiled pawn
structure and the open position of his king.}) 12. Bf5 $1 {This was the
novelty we had found - the fruit of three days of preparatory work.} ({The
third game went} 12. Qf3 $6 cxd4 $1 13. exd4 Nxe5 14. dxe5 Nd7 15. Bxe7 Qxe7
16. Nxd5 Qxe5 17. Ne7+ Kh8 $1 18. Qxb7 Nc5 {with a quick draw. --- I remember
how on the eve of the game Botvinnik arrived at the Azerbaijan permanent
representative's residence in Moscow, where our team was living during the
match, and I showed him the main variations that were possible after 12 Bf5.
Botvinnik studied the position carefully and approvingly murmured: 'Hmm... A
good idea!'}) 12... Nxe5 {(25)} ({At just the right time (after} 12... Re8 $6
13. f4 {the white knight would have been transformed into an impregnable
fortress). Beliavsky made this natural move after a long think, although the
bishop move to f5 is fairly obvious and it could have been anticipated in
careful preparatory analysis.}) ({It was no better to play} 12... g6 13. Bxd7
Nxd7 14. Nxd7 Qxd7 15. Bxe7 Qxe7 16. dxc5 {(Stohl)}) ({or} 12... cxd4 13. Nxd7
$1 (13. exd4 $5) 13... Nxd7 14. Bxe7 Qxe7 15. Qxd4 {, when Black is condemned
to a cheerless defence, which is especially unpleasant in a nervy match
situation.}) 13. dxe5 Ne8 {(4)} ({After the typical} 13... Ne4 {(?) the
spectacular} 14. Nxd5 $1 {would have been decisive.}) (13... Nd7 $6 14. Bxe7
Qxe7 15. f4 {was also not good for Black.}) ({Previously I gave preference to} 
13... Nh7 {, but here too after} 14. Bxe7 $1 ({Stohl gives only} 14. Bg3 Ng5)
14... Qxe7 15. f4 Rfd8 16. Qg4 {the initiative is with White (if} Nf8 {, then}
17. Rf3 {).}) 14. Bg3 {Now there is no longer any point in exchanging the
bishops: Black is cramped and he has little space for manoeuvring.} Nc7 $2 {
(21) Allowing an aggressive sortie by the white queen, after which all the
same the knight cannot go to e6 and, forced to vegetate on c7, it will be a
source of constant concern for Black.} ({He should first have forced the white
bishop to declare its intentions -} 14... g6 $1 {, for example:} 15. -- (15.
Bg4 {, provoking Black into the win of a piece -} h5 $6 ({and after} 15... Nc7
16. Bf3 {White would have retained a slight plus}) 16. Bf3 h4 (16... Nc7 17. h3
Qd7 18. Qc2) 17. Bf4 g5 $6 (17... Nc7 18. h3) 18. Bxd5 $1 {, in order after}
Bxd5 19. Nxd5 gxf4 20. Qg4+ Ng7 21. Rad1 f5 22. Qxf4 {to obtain an
overwhelming advantage.}) (15. Bc2 $5 Qd7 (15... Nc7 {(g7)} 16. Qf3 $1 {- Stohl
}) 16. Qe2 Nc7 17. Rfd1 h5 18. h3 {, and the bishop on c2 may support the
attack on the king (after f2-f4-f5) or the pressure on the d5-pawn (by Bb3).
Even so, 14...g6 was the lesser evil.})) 15. Qg4 $1 {(3)} Qe8 $6 {(17) It is
already hard to offer Black any good advice.} (15... g6 $2 {did not work in
view of} 16. Bxg6 $1 fxg6 17. Qxg6+ Kh8 18. Qxh6+ Kg8 19. Qg6+ Kh8 20. f4 $1 {
and f4-f5 with crushing threats.}) ({But in 'The Test of Time' I recommended} 
15... Bc8 16. Rad1 Bxf5 (16... Be6 $2 17. Nxd5 $1 Bxd5 18. e4) 17. Qxf5 d4 {
'in the hope of saving some kind of ending a pawn down', for example:} 18. Ne2
{(?!)} ({, or} 18. Qg4 Qc8 ({not} 18... Ne6 $6 19. f4 $1 {with a powerful
attack}) 19. Qxc8 Raxc8 20. exd4 cxd4 21. Rxd4 Rfd8) (18. Qe4 $5 {is more
energetic, with the idea of} Ne6 19. f4) 18... Ne6 19. Qe4 Qd7 20. exd4 cxd4
21. Nxd4 Rad8 {(Stohl).}) 16. Bd7 $1 Qd8 {(4)} ({Our home analysis concluded
with the variation} 16... Bc8 $2 17. e6 $1 {and wins. But in fact it all
turned out to be not so simple!}) 17. Rad1 {(12) Naturally, White brings his
rook to the decisive part of the battlefield.} h5 {(12) In a desperate
situation Beliavsky tries to ease the defence by exchanging the dark-square
bishops, even at the cost of a weakening of his king's defences.} 18. Qh3 {(2)}
h4 19. Bf4 Bg5 ({Weak is} 19... Bc8 $2 20. Nxd5 $1) ({or} 19... g5 $2 20. Qg4
$1 Kg7 21. Bxg5 $1 Bxg5 22. f4 {and wins.}) 20. Bf5 $1 {(3) Playing White
here is easy and pleasant: clearly visible is the aim of the attack, in which
all his pieces are ready to take part.} g6 {(22) After this Black will hardly
be able to save the game, but what instead?} ({immediate} 20... Bxf4 21. exf4
d4 (21... Qe7 22. Ne4 $1) {, would have prevented the switching of the white
knight to the kingside, but after} 22. Ne4 Bxe4 (22... g6 23. Qg4 $1) 23. Bxe4
Rb8 24. f5 Re8 (24... Qg5 25. f4 Qh5 26. Rd3 $1) 25. f4 {White's powerful pawn
group quickly decides the outcome (} f6 26. Qxh4 fxe5 $6 27. f6 $1 {).}) (20...
Qe7 21. Ne4 $1 Ne6 $1 (21... Bxf4 $2 22. Nf6+ $1) (21... dxe4 $2 22. Rd7) 22.
Nxg5 Nxg5 {was somewhat more tenacious, although in this case too after} 23.
Qg4 $1 (23. Bxg5 Qxg5 24. f4 {too is not bad}) 23... Ne6 24. Bh6 {White would
also retain a fearfully strong attack (} Kh8 $2 25. Qh5 $1 {). But now there
follows a decisive combination.}) 21. Ne4 $1 {(3)} Bxf4 {(7)} ({After} 21...
Be7 {my suggestion in 'The Test of Time'} 22. -- (22. Nd6 {(?!)} Bxd6 ({after
Stohl's move} 22... Ba6 {(?) there is the decisive} 23. Qg4 $1) 23. exd6 {is
unclear in view of} Ne8 $1) ({, but} 22. Qg4 $1 Bc8 23. Bg5 $1 Bxg5 (23... Bxf5
24. Qxh4) 24. Nxg5 {wins outright, for example:} f6 ({or} 24... Kg7 25. e4 $1
d4 26. f4 Ba6 27. Rf2 Rh8 28. Bxg6 $1 fxg6 29. f5) 25. Ne6 $1 Qe8 26. Nxc7 Bxf5
27. Qxh4 {.})) 22. exf4 gxf5 $2 {(2) Equivalent to capitulation: Black was
overwhelmed by the threat of Nd6 or Nf6+ and Qxh4. The only way to prolong the
resistance was by declining the sacrifice.} ({True, after} 22... Kg7 23. Nd6
Ba6 24. Rfe1 Qe7 25. Qg4 Rad8 26. Bb1 Rxd6 {(there is nothing else)} 27. exd6
Qxd6 28. Qxh4 {White would most probably have been able to convert his
exchange advantage}) ({while in the event of} 22... d4 {Black would have had
to reckon not only with the simple} 23. Nf6+ (23. Qg4 Kg7 24. Nd6 Bd5 25. Bc2
$1 {and f4-f5}) 23... Kg7 24. Qxh4 {.}) 23. Qxf5 $1 {This leads to the
inevitable demise of the black king.} dxe4 {(11)} ({Black would have lost
immediately after both} 23... Kg7 $2 24. Qg4+ Kh8 25. Ng5 {(Stohl)}) ({and} 
23... Ne8 $2 24. Nf6+ $1) ({as well as} 23... f6 $2 24. Qg4+ Kh7 (24... Kf7 25.
Nd6+) 25. Qxh4+ Kg7 26. Qg4+ Kh7 27. Rd3 {, with mate.}) 24. Qg4+ $1 Kh7 {(2)}
25. Rxd8 Rfxd8 26. Qxh4+ Kg8 {Despite the approximate material equality, Black
is lost because of the poor placing of his pieces.} 27. Qe7 {(5)} ({Previously
I attached an exclamation mark to this move, condemning the 'over-hasty'} 27.
f5 {(!) - when after} Rd7 {Black would supposedly have been able to
'coordinate his pieces', but this was a mirage:} 28. Qg5+ Kh7 (28... Kf8 29. h4
) 29. Qg4 $1 Rad8 (29... Rg8 $2 30. Qh3+ $1 Kg7 31. f6+) 30. e6 {, and the
curtain comes down.}) 27... e3 $1 {A clever resource;} (27... e3 {forcing
White to display a certain accuracy (} 28. Qxc7 $4 e2 $1 29. Qxb7 $2 Rd1 $1 30.
Qxa8+ Kg7 {).}) 28. Re1 {(9) The spurt by the black pawn shocked me slightly,
and I did not immediately find the correct reply.} (28. f3 Ba6 29. Re1 {was
also good, followed by f4-f5 and e5-e6.}) ({There is no sense in getting
involved in} 28. fxe3 $6 Rd2 $1 {.}) 28... exf2+ {(10)} ({In severe
time-trouble Beliavsky missed chances to go fishing in troubled waters:} 28...
e2 29. f3 Rd1 30. Kf2 Ba6 (30... Rad8 31. f5) 31. Qxc7 (31. f5 $5 {- Stohl})
31... Rad8 32. Qxa7 $1 (32. f5 $2 R8d2 $1) 32... Rxe1 33. Qxa6 Red1 ({after} 
33... Rdd1 34. Qxb6 {the e2-pawn becomes a burden and Black is absolutely
helpless}) 34. Kxe2 R8d2+ {. According to Stohl, Black has some drawing
chances, but after} 35. Ke3 Rxb2 36. f5 {the win for White is fairly simple}) (
28... Rd2 $5 29. f3 $1 Rad8 30. f5 $1 ({avoiding a trap:} 30. Rxe3 $2 R8d7 $1
31. Qg5+ Kf8 {- Stohl}) 30... R8d7 31. Qg5+ Kh7 32. h4 Rxb2 (32... Rd1 33. Qxe3
) 33. e6 Rdd2 34. Qh5+ Kg8 35. Qxf7+ Kh8 36. Qh5+ Kg8 37. Qg5+ Kh8 38. Rxe3
Rxg2+ 39. Qxg2 Rxg2+ 40. Kxg2 {- the triumph of the white infantry!}) 29. Kxf2
Rd2+ 30. Re2 Rxe2+ 31. Kxe2 Ba6+ 32. Kf2 Ne6 {(3)} 33. f5 Nd4 ({Or} 33... Ng7
34. e6 $1 Rf8 35. Qxa7 {.}) 34. e6 Rf8 35. Qg5+ Kh7 36. e7 Re8 37. f6 Ne6 38.
Qh5+ Kg8 ({In view of} 38... Kg8 39. Qg4+ Kh7 40. Qa4 $1 (40. Qxe6 $5) 40...
Nc7 41. Qe4+ {(d7). --- Times: 0.50-2.29. --- This win, gained on the day of
Fischer's 40th birthday, was very important in the competitive sense: in the
shortest possible time I regained my lost lead in the match, and with it also
my composure. The game very much appealed to Botvinnik, reminding him of his
own youth: he always especially valued thorough opening preparation and
energetic play in the middlegame. --- Probably the key game in the match was
the 6th, before which I was again gripped by a certain anxiety. On this
occasion I took the risk of repeating the Tarrasch Defence - and Beliavsky was
fully ready for it! Even so, I managed to gain a draw (cf. Game No.79, note to
White's 12th move) and retain the lead with four games to go. This draw
inspired me more than the preceding win. --- But in the 7th game Beliavsky
improved the defence in the same line of the 'Karlsbad' (cf. Game No.80, note
to Black's 10th move), played with great concentration and, by displaying
resourcefulness, succeeded in holding a position that was not without its
dangers. The score became 4-3 in my favour, and the match entered the
finishing straight.}) 1-0

[Event "81: Candidates Quarter-Final, Moscow"]
[Site "?"]
[Date "1983.03.15"]
[Round "8"]
[White "Beliavsky, A."]
[Black "Kasparov, G."]
[Result "0-1"]
[ECO "E81"]
[Annotator "Garry Kasparov"]
[PlyCount "92"]
[EventDate "1983.??.??"]
[Source "Everyman Chess"]
[SourceDate "2012.11.28"]

{Now, in view of his 'retreating' play with Black, Beliavsky could hope for
success only in the 8th and 10th games. And for the 8th he arrived extremely
eager for a fight, with grounds for optimism, remembering my failure in the
Nimzo-Indian (4th game) and my opening problems in the Tarrasch (6th game).
But I sprang another surprise on my opponent, by employing my favourite King's
Indian Defence.} 1. d4 Nf6 2. c4 g6 3. Nc3 Bg7 {Although before the match
Beliavsky had of course prepared for the King's Indian, that day he least of
all expected it to occur. It was far more logical to assume that in the three
remaining games I would endeavour to play as solidly as possible, not
objecting to a draw. But instead of this Beliavsky was unexpectedly offered a
fierce battle on ground that I had studied before the game, but he had not. It
was I (and not he!) who decided to engage the opponent in a complicated
struggle, at a moment when he had nothing to lose. And apart from this purely
psychological move, I also had up my sleeve an interesting idea in the
variation usually employed by my opponent.} 4. e4 d6 5. f3 O-O (5... Nc6 {-
Game Nos. 12, 15.}) 6. Be3 a6 ({Instead of the usual move at that time,} 6...
Nc6 {(Game No.51), I chose a cunning continuation: for the moment Black does
not disclose his plans, inviting the opponent to reveal his intentions first.})
7. Bd3 {(5)} ({If} 7. Qd2 {Black can reply not only} Nc6 ({but also} 7... c6 {
, expressing his readiness for the double-edged} 8. O-O-O b5 {. However, I
suspected that Beliavsky would play 7 Bd3, since this move was considered to
be the best reply to 6...a6 (but incorrectly: 7 Qd2! is nevertheless better).})
) 7... c5 $1 {A comparatively rare variation with a pawn sacrifice, developed
by Timman. This move, which had not previously occurred in my games, caught
Beliavsky unawares! Again, as in the 2nd game, he felt that he was being 'led',
and when you are playing for a win this is a very unpleasant condition. ---
Black gives up a pawn, in order to weaken and undermine the enemy centre, and
this must be done precisely now, with the bishop on d3: a move earlier, after
7 dxc5 White could have advantageously exchanged queens.} 8. dxc5 {(5)} ({
Black would be quite happy to transpose into a good version of the Modern
Benoni by} 8. d5 e6 {(Shamkovich-Timman, Netanya 1975)}) ({or} 8. Nge2 Nc6 9.
d5 Ne5 10. a4 e6 {(Romanishin-A.Rodriguez, Cienfuegos 1977).}) 8... dxc5 9.
Bxc5 $6 {(2) Again Beliavsky fell short when faced with a surprise: his nerve
faltered and, as a consequence, his thinking discipline went awry.} ({It was
better to seize space -} 9. e5 Nfd7 10. f4 Nc6 11. Be4 {, but in the
well-known game Hübner-Timman, (Bad Lauterberg 1977) Black was successful after
} f6 12. exf6 ({and to improve White's play (say, by} 12. e6 $5 Nb6 13. Bxc5
Nxc4 14. Qe2 {), serious analytical work would have been required}) 12... Nxf6
{.}) 9... Nc6 10. Nge2 $6 {(15) A second inaccuracy, allowing my pieces to
occupy key positions in the centre.} ({The immediate} 10. Be3 {was correct,
after which Black has played} Nd7 {(the source game: Bobotsov-Timman,
Amsterdam 1971),} ({although} 10... Be6 {is also not bad, with the idea of} 11.
Nd5 $6 b5 $1 12. b3 Bxd5 13. cxd5 Nb4 {. In any event, he has a comfortable
'King's Indian' game.})) 10... Nd7 $1 {With gain of tempo! This move seemed
obvious to me, but later I discovered to my surprise that it was a novelty.} ({
A little earlier} 10... Ne5 11. Nd5 {occurred, and here instead of} e6 $2 ({it
was correct to play} 11... Nxd5 12. cxd5 Nxd3+ 13. Qxd3 Bxb2 14. Rb1 Qa5+ 15.
Qd2 Qxc5 {(Anikaev)} 16. Qxb2 f5 $1 {with counterplay}) 12. Be7 $1 {
(Anikaev-Yermolinsky, Telavi 1982).}) 11. Bf2 {(41) After a long think
Beliavsky moves the bishop close to his king.} ({The other retreats also had
their drawbacks:} 11. Ba3 Nde5 {- here it is even more difficult for White to
defend:} 12. -- (12. Nf4 $6 Qa5 $1) (12. Nc1 Be6 13. Nd5 b5 $1) ({, or} 12. Nd5
e6 ({or} 12... Re8 $5 13. f4 Qa5+ $1 {with excellent play for the pawn}) 13.
Bxf8 Bxf8 14. O-O exd5 15. cxd5 Qb6+ (15... Nb4 $5) 16. Kh1 Qe3 {, and Black's
activity is threatening})) (11. Be3 {(seemingly the most natural, but at e3
the bishop is liable to come under attack)} Nde5 12. Nc1 Be6 (12... Na5 $5) ({
my earlier move} 12... Nb4 {is rather worse because of} 13. Be2 $1) 13. Nd5 b5
$1 {, forcing} 14. cxb5 axb5 15. O-O Bxd5 16. exd5 Qxd5 17. Be4 Qxd1 18. Rxd1
Nc4 $1 {with a favourable ending for Black. --- At f2 the bishop does not have
to fear any attacks by the black cavalry, but on the other hand it does not
control the h6-c1 diagonal, which Black immediately exploits.}) 11... Nde5 {(5)
} 12. Nc1 Bh6 $1 {(24) I very much liked making such non-routine and
therefore unexpected moves.} ({Worthy alternatives were provided by the typical
} 12... Be6 13. Nd5 b5) ({or} 12... Nb4 13. Nd5 Nbxd3+ 14. Nxd3 e6 15. N5b4
Nxc4 16. Qc2 b5 {also with advantage to Black. But my 'sideways' bishop move
came as another unpleasant psychological blow to the opponent.}) 13. Nd5 $2 {
(26) A sign that White is rattled: this over-frisky knight leap leads to
dismal consequences.} ({He should have preferred the modest} 13. Be2 {,
reconciling himself to an inferior multi-piece endgame after} Qxd1+ 14. Nxd1
Be6 {.} 15. -- ({. The strength of Black's initiative is demonstrated by the
variation} 15. b3 $2 Nb4 16. O-O Nc2 17. Rb1 Na3 $1 18. Ra1 Bg7 19. Bc5 Nc6 $1
{, winning the exchange.}) ({. However, after} 15. Ne3 {the defensive
resources are far from exhausted:} Nd4 ({or} 15... Nb4 16. a3 (16. Rb1 f5 $5)
16... Bxe3 17. axb4 Nxc4 18. Bxc4 Bxf2+ 19. Kxf2 Bxc4 20. b3 Bb5 21. Ne2 Rfc8 {
, and in both cases, with accurate play, White will apparently escape with a
draw}) 16. Bd1 Rac8 17. b3 b5 18. Nd5 Bxd5 19. Bxd4 Nc6 20. Bf2 Be6 21. c5 Rfd8
{.})) 13... e6 {(2)} 14. Bb6 {(9)} Qg5 $1 {It rarely happens that the surprise
factor works so effectively - by the 15th move Beliavsky had already used 1
hour 45 minutes! However, as often happens, lengthy reflection did not improve
the quality of the moves made, and the result is that the loss of material for
White is already inevitable.} 15. O-O {(2) The only move that retains any
practical chances.} ({White would have lost immediately after} 15. Ne3 $2 Nd7
$1 {.}) 15... exd5 $1 {(14)} ({Depriving the opponent of counterplay, which
was possible after} 15... Nxd3 16. f4 $1 Nxf4 17. Nxf4 Qe5 18. Qf3 (18. Ncd3
Qxe4 19. Qb3 Nd4 20. Qc3 Nf5 21. Rae1 Qc6 22. c5 {, in both cases with some
compensation for the pawn}) 18... Qxb2 19. Nb3 {.}) 16. f4 {(3)} ({Earlier I
thought that 'White should perhaps have tried his luck playing a piece down' -
} 16. cxd5 Nxd3 17. Nxd3 {, but after} Ne5 {the fine-looking pawn pair in the
centre would not have compensated for the material deficit, for example:} 18.
f4 Qf6 19. Bc5 (19. Bd4 $2 Nf3+) 19... Nxd3 20. Qxd3 Re8 21. Bd4 Qd6 {etc.})
16... Qh4 {(3) Trying to provoke the weakening advance g2-g3.} ({I was
terribly proud of this move too, but now I think that the immediate} 16... Qe7
$5 {, with the strong threat of ...Qb4, would have been at least as good, for
example:} 17. -- (17. fxe5 Qb4 $1 18. Qb3 (18. Bf2 $2 dxc4) 18... Qxb3 19. axb3
Nxe5 {, winning a pawn and retaining the initiative}) ({, or} 17. cxd5 Qb4 $1 (
17... Nd7 $5 18. Bf2 Nb4 19. Bb1 Bxf4 20. a3 Nf6 $1 21. axb4 Ng4 22. g3 Nxf2
23. Kxf2 Qxb4 {is also tempting}) 18. Qb3 (18. Bf2 $2 Bxf4 19. dxc6 Ng4 $1 {
with an attack}) 18... Qxb3 19. axb3 Nxd3 20. Nxd3 Nb8 {, and again White does
not have sufficient compensation for the piece.})) 17. fxe5 {(2)} ({In the
event of} 17. g3 Qe7 18. cxd5 -- ({, I was intending to return the piece -} 
18... Nxd3 19. Nxd3 Qxe4 $1 20. dxc6 Qxc6 {, hoping to exploit the yawning
weakness of the long diagonal, but after} 21. Qb3 Be6 ({or} 21... Bh3 22. Rf2
Rfe8 23. Ne5 $1 {it would not be easy for Black to convert his advantage}) 22.
Ne5 $1 Qe4 23. Qf3) (18... Bg4 $1 {is more energetic:} 19. Be2 (19. Qb3 Nd7 $1)
19... Qb4 20. Qb3 ({or} 20. Bf2 Bxe2 ({both} 20... Bh3) ({and} 20... Qxb2 {are
also interesting}) 21. Qxe2 Nd4 22. Bxd4 Qxd4+ {and ...Nd7 with quite good
chances of demonstrating that the piece is worth more than the two pawns})
20... Qxb3 21. axb3 Bxe2 22. Nxe2 Nd7 $1 23. Bc7 Nb4 {.})) 17... d4 $1 {
Splitting White's position in two and creating an excellent post for the
h6-bishop on e3.} ({In the event of} 17... dxe4 $2 {White would have been
saved by the intermediate move} 18. Bf2 $1 {. Now, however, Black has a stable
advantage, although on the winning path there are still numerous technical
difficulties.}) 18. Ne2 {(7)} ({If} 18. Kh1 {there is the unpleasant} Bf4 19.
h3 Qg3 ({but more is promised by} 19... Nxe5 $5 20. Bxd4 Bxh3 $1 {(exposing
the king)} 21. Rxf4 Bxg2+ 22. Kxg2 Qxf4 {and ...Rad8 with an attack}) 20. Rxf4
{.}) 18... Be3+ {(5)} 19. Kh1 Nxe5 {(4)} 20. Bc7 {(4)} ({White hurries to get
rid of the powerful black knight, which after} 20. Nxd4 $6 Ng4 21. Nf3 Nf2+ 22.
Rxf2 Qxf2 {could have caused him irreparable damage.}) 20... Qe7 21. Bxe5 Qxe5
22. Qe1 Bd7 $1 {(8) Black completes his development and begins preparing a
siege of the central e4-pawn. Although this involves the exchange of queens,
Black's strong passed d-pawn and powerful bishop on e3 guarantee him an
excellent endgame.} 23. Qg3 {(5)} Rae8 (23... Qxg3 $5 24. Nxg3 Bc6 ({or} 24...
Rae8 {was somewhat simpler.})) 24. Nf4 {(4)} ({After} 24. Qxe5 Rxe5 25. Rad1 (
25. Nf4 $2 f5 $1 26. exf5 Bxf5 {and wins}) 25... Bc6 26. Bb1 ({or} 26. Ng3 h5)
26... Bxe4 27. Nxd4 Bxb1 28. Nf3 Re4 29. Rxb1 Rxc4 {White's saving chances are
pretty slight.}) 24... Bc6 $6 {(25)} ({I spent a long time wondering whether I
should play} 24... f5 $1 25. exf5 Bxf5 {, but I decided that here after} 26.
Rad1 {White has more opportunities for resistance: he has got rid of his weak
e4-pawn and maintained material equality. However, the accurate} Rf7 $1 {,
with the idea of} 27. b3 ({or} 27. c5 $1 Kg7 $1 28. Bc4 Rff8 29. Nd5 (29. b4 a5
$1) 29... Qxg3 30. hxg3 Be6 {would have left Black with an obvious advantage})
27... Be4 $1 28. Bxe4 $2 Bxf4 {, when White does not have the check Bd5.}) 25.
Nd5 Qxg3 26. hxg3 ({Things would not have been improved by} 26. Nf6+ Kh8 ({an
exchange sacrifice is also interesting -} 26... Kg7 27. Nxe8+ Rxe8 28. hxg3 Re5
) 27. hxg3 Re5 {followed by ...Kg7, ...Bg5, ...b7-b5 and clear play against
the weak white pawns.}) 26... Re5 {(3)} 27. g4 {(3)} ({White would like to
eliminate the dangerous bishop on e3, but the immediate} 27. Nxe3 $2 dxe3 28.
Rae1 {is bad because of the simple} Bxe4 {(} 29. Rxe3 $2 Bxg2+ $1 {).}) 27...
h5 $5 {(7)} 28. Nf6+ {(2)} ({And again it was dangerous to play} 28. Nxe3 dxe3
{, for example:} 29. gxh5 $6 (29. Rae1 Bxe4 ({this is probably simpler than my
'Informator' recommendation} 29... hxg4 30. Rxe3 f5) 30. Bxe4 Rxe4 31. gxh5
gxh5 32. Rf3 Rfe8 {, and White cannot hold out}) 29... Rxh5+ 30. Kg1 f5 $1 {,
retaining the lethal e3-pawn.}) 28... Kg7 29. gxh5 Rh8 $1 {The last
turning-point.} 30. g3 $2 {(4) A fatal weakening of the long diagonal.} ({
White would also have lost after} 30. g4 $2 gxh5 ({my earlier recommendation} 
30... Re6 31. Nd5 gxh5 {is less good because of} 32. g5 $1) 31. g5 ({or} 31.
Nxh5+ Rhxh5+ $1 32. gxh5 f5 {and ...fxe4}) 31... Rxg5 {.}) ({But} 30. Kh2 $1 {
was far more resilient, and although after the approximate} Bg5 31. Nd5 Bd8 32.
Rad1 Rexh5+ 33. Kg3 (33. Kg1 $5 Rh2 $1) 33... Rg5+ {Black has a dominating
position, he is still a long way from a win.}) 30... Rexh5+ $6 {(11)} ({
Instead of this 'creative' exchange sacrifice,} 30... Bg5 $1 31. Nd5 f5 $1 {
would have led immediately to the goal, creating a pair of connected passed
pawns, since} 32. exf5 {, fails to} (32. Rae1 Rhe8 $1) 32... Rxd5 $1 33. cxd5 (
33. f6+ Kg8) 33... Bxd5+ 34. Kg1 Be3+ 35. Rf2 Rxh5 {with crushing threats.})
31. Nxh5+ Rxh5+ 32. Kg2 {(2)} f5 33. Rae1 {(7)} ({Alas, the appearance of a
pair of connected passed pawns cannot be avoided:} 33. Kf3 $2 fxe4+ 34. Bxe4
Rf5+ {and ...Bxe4. --- 'Here White had just one minute left, and the
spectators were interested in only one thing: would Beliavsky manage to make
seven moves before his flag fell.' (Nikitin)}) 33... fxe4 34. Bb1 Rc5 $1 {
Black's task has become somewhat more complicated, but the powerful pawn pair
in the centre, supported by the two bishops, should nevertheless decide the
outcome in his favour.} 35. b3 b5 36. Rxe3 ({In desperate time-trouble
Beliavsky returns the exchange, realising that passive defence after} 36. cxb5
{(otherwise 36...bxc4 is decisive)} axb5 {is hopeless: the blockading ...b5-b4
is threatened,} 37. b4 ({and in the event of} 37. a4 b4 $1 {the weakness of
the b3-pawn causes White's downfall}) 37... Rc3 {(c4) does not help.}) 36...
dxe3 37. Re1 bxc4 38. bxc4 ({There could have been a spectacular finish after} 
38. b4 Rf5 $1 39. Rxe3 Rf3 $1 40. Rxf3 (40. Re1 e3) 40... exf3+ 41. Kf2 Ba4 $1
42. Kxf3 c3 {, when the bishop would have to be given up for this pawn.}) 38...
Rxc4 39. Rxe3 Rb4 $5 (39... Kf6) ({or} 39... a5 {followed by ...Kf6-e5 was
also good. In any event, Black is a pawn up and still has a dominating
position. White's hopes, based on the limited amount of material remaining,
are illusory.}) 40. Rb3 ({Agreeing to go into a lost bishop endgame, since} 40.
Re1 Kf6 {(} 41. Kh3 Kg5 $1 {) was also unattractive.}) 40... e3+ {(2)} 41. Kf1
Bb5+ $1 {(3)} 42. Ke1 ({Or} 42. Kg2 e2 43. Kf2 Rd4 $1 {and wins.}) 42... a5 $5
{(6) A piquant touch: to be on the safe side I prevent the white king from
going to c3 (43 Kd1? Ba4);} ({although, of course,} 42... Rxb3 43. axb3 g5 44.
Kd1 Kf6 {etc. would also have won easily. --- But now too the black king
proceeds via a red carpet into the opponent's position.}) 43. Be4 {(8)} Rxb3
44. axb3 Kf6 45. Kd1 g5 46. Kc2 {(2)} Ke5 ({All the defensive resources are
exhausted (} 46... Ke5 47. Bd3 ({or} 47. Bg6 Kd4) 47... e2 {). --- Times: 2.41-2.10.}) (46... -- {A heavy psychological defeat: White did not in fact
manage to begin active play in a game in which he was prepared to play for a
win. The score became 5-3, and the fate of the match was largely decided. ---
In the 9th game after 1 d4 Beliavsky threw caution to the winds - 1...Nf6 2
Nf3! (instead of the automatic 2 c4 - a little ruse, to disrupt the opponent's
plans) 2...c5 3 d5 d6 4 Nc3 g6 5 e4 Bg7 6 Bb5+ Bd7?! 7 a4 0-0 8 0-0 Na6. This
set-up resembles the 32nd game of the match in Baguio (1978). After 9 Re1
Nb4?! (an inaccuracy in an unfamiliar situation) 10 h3! e6 11 Bf4 White gained
an enduring advantage and won on the 32nd move. At the end of the game, hardly
betraying his emotions, Beliavsky stood up and congratulated me on my victory.}
) (46... -- {This was how my first Candidates match concluded, a match which,
in the words of the chief arbiter Vladas Mikenas, took place in an
exceptionally correct and friendly competitive atmosphere. Do not be deluded
by the 6-3 final score: in almost every game there was a very tense and
interesting battle. --- Now, years later, it seems to me that on the whole I
acted quite maturely in this match. The only failure in my preparation, before
the 4th game, when I hastily changed opening, was a quite admissible error for
a 20-year-old debutant. And my opening moves in the 8th and 9th games show
that I had already begun to grasp the psychology of match play. Far more than
me, Beliavsky was hindered by his lack of match experience, which deprived him
of the required flexibility. Although he was the strongest of the possible
quarter-final opponents, for me the most difficult could have been the
highly-experienced Portisch. I thought about this for the first time during my
semi-final match with Korchnoi...}) 0-1

[Event "?"]
[Site "?"]
[Date "????.??.??"]
[Round "?"]
[White "Riga Novelty"]
[Black "?"]
[Result "*"]
[Annotator "Garry Kasparov"]
[PlyCount "1"]
[EventDate "1984.??.??"]
[SourceDate "2012.12.08"]

{USSR Spartakiad (Moscow, 14-28 July 1983), semi-final tournament: 1. Ukraine
- 27 out of 40; 2. Latvia - 26½; 3. Azerbaijan - 19½ (Kasparov - 1 out
of 2); 4. Moldova - 19; 5. Kirghizia - 18½; 6. Turkmenistan - 9½.} 1. --
{The game given below took place largely by accident, since I had not been
planning to play in the USSR Spartakiad in July. My Candidates semi-final
match with Korchnoi - the most important match of the entire cycle - was due
to begin on 1st August 1983. But where? The choice of venue for the match
provoked a crisis - the first of many accompanying the rule of Campomanes.
This unprecedented intrigue is described in detail in Kasparov vs. Karpov
1975-1985, and here I will merely remind you of the main facts. --- Korchnoi
and I were offered three cities: Las Palmas, Rotterdam and Pasadena, a suburb
of Los Angeles. According to the FIDE rules, each player had to put them down
in order of preference. Korchnoi chose Rotterdam alone. In my list, sent in
the middle of May to the Sports Committee, I also put Rotterdam in first place,
and Las Palmas second. However, the head of the Sports Committee suggested
that I change the cities round. Why? It was explained to me that all the same
Las Palmas would not be chosen (it had the smallest prize fund), but it was
politically important to support it. I did not attach any significance to this
- Rotterdam was in both lists - and I agreed. But this proved to be a mistake:
at that time I did not know (but it must have been known by our sports
leaders!), that if the opinions of the participants even slightly disagreed,
the FIDE President had the personal right to choose any city. And Campomanes
chose Pasadena!} (1. -- {A fortnight later Korchnoi expressed his agreement
with this decision, whereas the Soviet leadership categorically rejected it.
Many did not in fact understand why. The official version was that the safety
of Kasparov and the members of his delegation could not be guaranteed, since
Pasadena was closed to Soviet diplomats. Although at precisely that time the
Soviet swimmer Vladimir Salnikov was setting new records in the swimming pools
of Los Angeles... --- My personal acquaintance with the off-board politics
began on 12th July 1983. I was summoned from Baku to Moscow for discussions
with Campomanes. But first I had a conversation in the Propaganda Department
of the USSR Communist Party Central Committee with Boris Stukalin, the head of
the department, in the presence of a KGB general. I was told that we were a
great country and would not allow conditions to be dictated to us: 'The match
will not take place in America!' As a result, I was forced to refuse to play
in Pasadena, not doubting that soon everything would be sorted out. --- The
meeting with Campomanes took place at 9 p.m. that same day in the Sports
Committee. It was attended by the chairman of the USSR Sports Committee Marat
Gramov, Ivonin, Krogius, Sevastyanov, Karpov, Smyslov and myself. After ninety
minutes of discussions (Gramov pressed, but Campomanes defended himself, and
did not give ground) nearly everyone began raising their voices. I remember
saying to Campomanes: 'Mr President, with your decision you have encroached on
the right of the Candidates to choose the match venue.' He replied: 'That's
true, but why didn't you put Rotterdam in first place?' Here I felt I was
beginning to understand a few things...}) (1. -- {My match with Korchnoi was
left in the air, pending the fulfilment of unrealisable conditions. I returned
home at about one in the morning, tired and depressed. I said to my mother: 'I
don't understand anything, but it would appear that I've been betrayed.' Two
days later, at a press conference in Tunis, Campomanes stated: 'If Kasparov
does not turn up for the match on the appointed day, 1st August, he will be
forfeited.' I phoned the Propaganda Department, where just a few days earlier
they had guaranteed me support. To the question, what would happen with me
next, Stukalin replied: 'As a citizen, you must realise that it is in the
interests of the country.' But when I asked why I was the only one to miss out,
he said (this time addressing me formally): 'You are still young; you can
afford to wait for three years.' --- It was during those days of crisis that I
spoke with Karpov for the first time. The private meeting, which took place at
his home on 15th July, was psychologically very difficult for me. Not knowing
all the complexities of the behind-the-scenes struggle being conducted around
the match, I instinctively sensed the danger. After all, I already knew that
in the Central Committee and the KGB they considered the match in Pasadena to
be a politically incorrect step. It is probable that already then it had been
decided to boycott the 1984 Olympiad in Los Angeles. And Karpov knew about
this. His promise to find in the future some other way of including me in the
Candidates cycle, if the match with Korchnoi nevertheless did not take place,
merely strengthened my suspicions.}) (1. -- {Gramov advised me to return to
Baku, but I remained in Moscow, awaiting some decision. Soon Campomanes
announced that the match was being postponed by five days. --- It was at just
that time that the USSR Spartakiad was taking place in the Druzhba Sports
Complex in Moscow. Since I was in a state of suspension and was in danger of
losing my form, by a special degree the Sports Committee allowed me to appear
for the Azerbaijan team without previously registering. And I played two games
with White on board 1 in the semi-final tournament - on 16th July with Mikhail
Tal (Latvia) and on 21st July with Alexander Beliavsky (Ukraine). Both ended
in a draw, but whereas against Beliavsky I had a completely winning position,
Tal solved all his problems with the help of an excellent novelty in the
topical Botvinnik Variation. --- When I went along to this game, I least of
all expected that within a few minutes the fierce opening dispute from my
double clash with Timoshchenko and Dorfman in the 49th USSR Championship (1981)
would again flare up.}) *

[Event "82: USSR Spartakiad, Moscow"]
[Site "?"]
[Date "1983.07.16"]
[Round "2"]
[White "Kasparov, G."]
[Black "Tal, M."]
[Result "1/2-1/2"]
[ECO "D44"]
[Annotator "Garry Kasparov"]
[PlyCount "86"]
[EventDate "1983.??.??"]
[Source "Everyman Chess"]
[SourceDate "2012.11.28"]

1. d4 Nf6 2. c4 e6 3. Nf3 d5 {(2)} 4. Nc3 c6 {(5)} 5. Bg5 dxc4 ({Naturally, I
had prepared for a repetition of our duel in the Interzonal Tournament (1982):
} 5... h6 6. Bh4 $5 ({not the insipid} 6. Bxf6) 6... dxc4 7. e4 g5 8. Bg3 b5 9.
Be2 Bb7 10. e5 $5 {a novelty;} ({later both} 10. Ne5) ({and} 10. h4 g4 11. Ne5
{were introduced}) 10... Nd5 11. h4 Qa5 (11... g4 $5) 12. Rc1 g4 13. Nd2 c5 $1
14. Nce4 $6 cxd4 15. O-O h5 $6 (15... Nc6 $1) 16. a4 $1 a6 $2 (16... d3 $1) 17.
b4 $2 ({and here instead of the senseless 17 b4 White had the very strong} 17.
Bxc4 $1 bxc4 18. Nxc4 Qb4 19. f3 $3 {- pointed out in analysis after the game
by Petrosian (cf. 'Revolution in the 70s' pp.313-316)}) 17... Qd8 18. Bxc4 bxc4
19. Nxc4 Nc3 20. Nxc3 dxc3 21. Nd6+ Bxd6 22. exd6 Qf6 23. Qd3 O-O 24. Rxc3 Bd5
$1 {(when Tal agreed to a draw!). --- But on this occasion Tal unexpectedly
chose the most critical line, by immediately capturing the c4-pawn.}) 6. e4 {
(2)} b5 7. e5 h6 8. Bh4 g5 9. Nxg5 hxg5 10. Bxg5 Nbd7 11. exf6 {(2)} Bb7 12. g3
c5 {(3)} 13. d5 Qb6 ({Black is following the main line of the Botvinnik
Variation, avoiding} 13... Bh6 {which was fashionable at that time. Where does
the surprise await me?}) 14. Bg2 O-O-O 15. O-O b4 16. Na4 Qb5 {(2)} 17. a3 Nb8
{It was this continuation that led Timoshchenko and Dorfman to disaster!} ({
Over the next eighteen months Black's unsuccessful attempts to rehabilitate
the variation were associated with} 17... exd5 {(which has, nevertheless,
become the main move!).}) 18. axb4 {(4)} cxb4 19. Be3 {(16) I had to spend
some time completely restoring in my memory the course of events in the
previously played games. Everything seemed fine, and the next three moves were
made quickly and confidently.} ({It was only after this game that White began
playing} 19. Qd4 $5) ({or} 19. Qg4 $1 {(cf. Game No.65, note to White's 19th
move).}) 19... Bxd5 20. Bxd5 Rxd5 21. Qe2 Nc6 22. Rfc1 Ne5 $1 {This is Tal's
novelty!} ({Both Timoshchenko and Dorfman played} 22... Na5 {, keeping the
knight for the defence of the queenside and threatening a possible ...Nb3 
(Game Nos. 65, 66). But on a5 the knight proved subsequently to be out of play
and it became a convenient target for the white pieces, whereas at e5 it is
actively placed, fulfilling both defensive and attacking functions. --- It is
surprising that for nearly two years such a natural move to the centre as 22...
Ne5 escaped the attention of the leading players and only occurred not long
before the Spartakiad in the little-known game Salov-Shabalov (Leningrad 1983).
'It can be assumed that Tal learned about this idea from his talented young
compatriot from Riga.' (Stohl)}) 23. b3 $5 {(29) This reply did not come
easily to me. After weighing up everything 'for' and 'against', I followed the
familiar path (with the knight sacrifice on a4!), although I sensed the danger
associated with the active knight on e5.} ({The direct} 23. f4 {was rejected
in view of the variation} Nd3 24. Rxc4+ Qxc4 25. Rc1 Qxc1+ 26. Bxc1 Nxc1 27.
Qc4+ Kb8 $1 28. Qxc1 Bd6 $1 {and ...Rc8, in which, in view of the poor
position of the white knight, Black has at least equal chances.}) ({It was
more difficult to reject the capture} 23. Bxa7 {, helping the activation of
the knight on a4. However, after} Kb7 $1 ({but not} 23... Bh6 $2 24. Nb6+ $1 {
, as in the Salov-Shabalov game}) 24. -- ({, it is too early for} 24. Nb6 $6 c3
$1 25. Qxb5 Rxb5 {, when, since} 26. bxc3 $2 Bc5 ({or} 26... b3 27. Rcb1 Bc5 {
is bad for White, there only remains the inglorious retreat 26 Na4.})) ({. It
appeared that White should first bring his bishop home -} 24. Be3 {(?!)} -- ({
, with the idea of} 24... Bh6 $6 25. f4 $1) ({, or} 24... Nd3 $6 25. Rc2 $1 {
and the threat of Nb6. But to lose a tempo in such a sharp position seemed
rather frightening...}) ({. I rejected this variation purely intuitively, and
subsequent home analysis confirmed that I was right:} 24... Qc6 $6 {(with the
deadly threat of moving the rook from d5 followed by ...Nf3+)} 25. Nb6 $1 Rc5
$1 ({the only move:} 25... Rd4 $2 26. Bxd4 Nf3+ 27. Qxf3 $1 {and Nxc4}) (25...
Rd2 $2 26. Nxc4 $1) (25... Rd3 $2 26. Ra7+ $1) ({or} 25... Rd6 $2 26. Ra7+ $1
Kb8 27. Ra8+ Kb7 28. Nxc4 Nf3+ 29. Qxf3 $1 Qxf3 30. Na5+ $1 Kxa8 31. Rc8# $3 {
- a unique pure mate!}) 26. Bxc5 Nf3+ $1 27. Qxf3 $1 Qxf3 28. Be3 Bh6 29. Nxc4
Bxe3 30. Nxe3 Qxf6 31. Nc4 Qh6 {, and White has only a draw}) (24... Rd3 $1 {
- the threat of ...Qc6 and ...Nf3+ sets White very difficult problems.} 25. --
({. White cannot play} 25. Nb6 $2 Rxe3 $1 26. Qxe3 Bc5) ({, or} 25. f4 $2 Rxh2
$3 26. Kxh2 Rxe3 $1 27. Qd1 Rd3 $1 (27... Re1 $5 {- Stohl}) 28. Qh1+ Nf3+ 29.
Kg2 Qc6 30. Rd1 Re3 $1 {with an irresistible attack (} 31. Kh3 e5 $1 {).}) ({
. Also, nothing is promised by} 25. Rf1 Qc6 26. f3 (26. f4 Qe4 (26... Ng4 $5)
27. Rae1 Nd7 {with an obvious advantage for Black}) 26... Bd6 27. Kg2 Rb3 $1 {
. It was good that I made this sombre discovery in analysis: to encounter 24..
.Rd3! during the game would have been far more unpleasant.}))) ({. The attempt
to neutralise this idea by} 24. Qe4 $6 {(instead of 24 Be3) is not very
successful:} Qc6 25. Bd4 Rxd4 $1 26. Qxe5 Qd5 $1 {etc.}) ({. And even after
the comparatively better} 24. h4 Bd6 $1 ({the sharp endgame after} 24... Rd3
25. Qe4+ Qd5 26. Qxd5+ exd5 $1 27. Nc5+ Bxc5 28. Bxc5 Rb3 {gives drawing
counter-chances}) 25. Be3 (25. Rd1 Ra8 $1) 25... Rd3 {White would have had to
find the only way of maintaining a shaky equality.})) 23... c3 {(2)} 24. Nxc3
$1 bxc3 25. Rxc3+ Kb8 $1 {(5) Black begins playing for an advantage (although
at the time we did not yet realise this).} (25... Kb7 $2 26. Qc2 $1 {would
have been fatal (Stohl)}) ({while} 25... Kd8 26. -- ({, would have led to
approximate equality -} 26. Qxb5 Rxb5 27. Rxa7 Bd6) ({, or to a draw -} 26.
Rxa7 Bd6 $1 27. Rc2 $1 Bb8 {(there is nothing better)} 28. Re7 Bd6) ({, or} 26.
Qc2 Nf3+ $1 27. Kg2 Qb7 $1 28. Rxa7 $1 Rxh2+ (28... Ne1+ {is also not bad}) 29.
Kxf3 Rf5+ 30. Ke2 Qf3+ 31. Kd2 Rxf2+ 32. Bxf2 Bh6+ $1 33. Ke1 Re5+ 34. Kf1 Qh1+
35. Bg1 Re1+ $1 {with perpetual check.})) 26. Qc2 {(42) This looks risky, but
for the moment the weakening of the f3-point is not yet fatal.} ({Again much
time was spent studying the variation} 26. Bxa7+ Kb7 {.} 27. -- ({. Of course,
White did not sacrifice the knight in order to continue} 27. Qxb5+ Rxb5 28. Be3
Bb4 29. Ra7+ Kb8 30. Rc1 Rh7 {with a depressing endgame.}) (27. Qe4 {
(Schneider-Andrianov, Kiev 1983) is also unfavourable in view of} Qb4 $1 28.
Qc2 (28. Rc4 $2 Qxb3 29. Rb1 Nf3+ $1) 28... Bd6 29. h4 (29. Ra4 $2 Nf3+ $3 30.
Rxf3 Qe1+ 31. Kg2 Rxh2+ $1 32. Kxh2 Rh5+ {and mate}) 29... Ra5 30. Rxa5 Qxa5 {
- White does not have his main tactical resource (b3-b4) and Black's extra
piece is worth more than the pawns.}) ({. There would only have remained} 27.
Qc2 Bd6 $1 28. b4 $1 {, as in the game.})) 26... Bd6 {(6)} (26... Nf3+ $2 {is
weak:} 27. Kg2 Ne1+ ({after} 27... Rxh2+ $2 28. Kxf3 Rf5+ 29. Kg4 {the
position of the king on b8 deprives Black of the spectacular} Rf4+) 28. Rxe1
Bb4 29. Rc1 Bxc3 30. Qxc3 {with excellent compensation for the exchange.}) 27.
Bxa7+ Kb7 28. b4 $1 {There is nothing else. As in my games with Timoshchenko
and Dorfman, this pawn is assigned an important role in the attack (the threat
of Ra5 has suddenly arisen). From the press: 'An excellent resource! Up to
this point it seemed to many, both in the auditorium and in the press centre,
that things were difficult for Kasparov: there appeared to be no concrete play
compensating for his material deficit, and White had spent a great deal of
time looking for the best moves. But now it was Black's turn to think.'} Nc6 $6
{(27) This reply suggests itself, but it is not the strongest.} ({Black had
some more promising possibilities:} 28... Rd3 $5 {(the threat of ...Nf3+
forces White to agree to simplification)} 29. Rxd3 Qxd3 30. Qxd3 Nxd3 31. Rd1
$1 Kxa7 32. Rxd3 Rd8 $1 {, and to gain a draw White still has to display some
accuracy, to avoid losing the f6-pawn:} 33. Kg2 (33. g4 $2 Bxh2+) 33... Bc7 34.
Rf3 Kb6 35. h4 {with the intention of g3-g4-g5}) (28... Ra8 $1 29. Ra5 $1 {
(the only chance)} Qd7 30. Bb6 $1 Ra6 $1 (30... Bb8 31. Qe4 $5 {is not so
clear - Stohl}) 31. Rxa6 Kxa6 32. Bc5 Kb7 {, and exceptional resourcefulness
is required of White to demonstrate that he has serious compensation for the
piece he has given up (true, optimism is inspired by the presence of the three
pawns and the fact that the enemy king will always be exposed).}) 29. Be3 {(10)
Now I am able to coordinate my forces, and it is Black who has to play
accurately. Tal again thought for a long time...} Be5 {(32) In the end the
ex-world champion chose a continuation which was not the most ambitious, after
which White was guaranteed a draw;} ({although initially he was inclined
towards} 29... Rc8 $5 {and he even wrote down this move on his scoresheet.} 30.
-- ({. And indeed, ...Be5 is threatened - say,} 30. Rb1 Be5 ({to my earlier
move} 30... Rc7 {there is the good reply} 31. h4) 31. Rc5 Qd3 {.}) ({. While if
} 30. Rc1 $6 {, then simply} Nxb4 {.}) ({. According to Tal, he did not like
the paradoxical reply} 30. f4 $5 {, depriving the black pieces of the
e5-square and in the event of} Bxb4 ({and second, he can decide on} 30... e5 $5
{without any particular fear}) 31. Rb1 Bxc3 {(?)} ({but first, Black can hold
on after} 31... Na7 $1 32. Rxc8 Nxc8 33. Rc1 Qd7 34. Rb1 Qb5) 32. Rxb5+ Rxb5
33. Qxc3 {giving White every chance of success.}) ({. But in a joint analysis
after the game I enthusiastically examined both 30 Rb1, and} 30. Qh7 $1 {- the
queen move would have been the surest and most pretty way of maintaining
equality:} Be5 31. Qxf7+ ({but not} 31. Rxc6 $2 Qxc6 $1 32. Qxf7+ Rc7 33. Ra7+
Kb8 {, when the mate threat on the back rank causes White's downfall}) 31...
Rc7 32. Qe8 Rd8 (32... Rc8 {with equality is also possible}) 33. f7 Bxc3 34.
Qxd8 Nxd8 ({or} 34... Bxa1 35. Qg8 $1 Rd7 $1 36. f8=Q Rd1+ 37. Kg2 Qf1+ 38. Kf3
Ne5+ 39. Kf4 Qc4+ 40. Kg5 Qg4+ 41. Kh6 Qh3+ 42. Kg5 Qg4+ {, in both cases with
perpetual check}) 35. Ra7+ Kc8 36. Ra8+ Kb7 $1 37. Ra7+ {. All this remained
off-stage, but that which occurred in the game was no less interesting.})) 30.
Rxc6 Bxa1 31. Rc7+ Kb8 32. Ba7+ {(2)} ({The capture of the pawn} 32. Rxf7 $2 {
would have allowed Black to offer an advantageous exchange of rooks by} Rd7 $1
{and to set about converting his material advantage (} 33. Re7 $5 Bxf6 34. Rxe6
Bd4 $1 {etc.).}) 32... Ka8 33. Be3 {White both demonstrates the strength of
his position (all the same Black is forced to return with his king to b8) and
saves time on the clock, of which there was not much remaining.} Kb8 {(2)} 34.
Ba7+ {(3)} Ka8 35. Bc5 $1 {(2)} Kb8 $1 {(2)} 36. Rxf7 $1 {(5) The battle for
a win continues! Black's extra rook is opposed by the enormous activity of the
white pieces and the far-advanced f-pawn.} Be5 $1 {(14)} ({Black would have
lost immediately after} 36... Qd3 $2 37. Ba7+) ({or} 36... Rhd8 $2 37. Bd6+ $1)
({while in the event of} 36... Rd7 $6 37. Bd6+ $1 Kb7 38. Qe4+ Kb6 (38... Ka6
$2 39. Qxe6 Rxf7 40. Bc5+ $1 {- Stohl}) 39. Bc5+ Kc7 40. Qxe6 Rxf7 41. Qxf7+
Qd7 42. Qc4 $1 {he would have had to fight for a draw:} Kb7 $1 43. f7 Bg7 44.
Qe4+ Qc6 45. Qe7+ Kc8 46. Qe2 Rd8 47. Be7 Rd4 {etc.}) 37. Ba7+ {(15)} ({At the
board I was no longer able to assess the variation} 37. Re7 $1 Rhd8 $1 (37...
Bxf6 $2 38. Bd6+ $1) 38. f7 Rd1+ 39. Kg2 Qc6+ $1 (39... Qf1+ $2 40. Kf3 Qh1+
41. Kg4) 40. Kh3 Qf3 $1 41. Qh7 $1 {- the only satisfactory defence against
mate, also creating the strong counter-threat of Re8 and f7-f8Q. Home analysis
enabled a very pretty draw to be discovered -} Bxg3 $1 42. fxg3 {, and here
Black can either give perpetual check himself -} Qf1+ {(Stohl),} ({or force it
by} 42... R1d5 43. Rb7+ $1 Kc8 44. Rc7+ $1 {(fantastic!)} Kb8 45. Rb7+ {. ---
This would have been the most worthy conclusion to the game, but instead of
this I decided to maintain the tension.})) (37. Kg2 $2 Rd3 $1 {.}) 37... Ka8
38. Be3 Rd7 $1 {(4)} ({Tal also continues the fight, fearing that after} 38...
Kb8 39. Re7 Rhd8 {the switching of the bishop from c5 to e3 would change the
assessment of the position to White's advantage. But this is not so:} 40. f7 (
40. Ba7+ Ka8 41. Be3 {with a draw is more solid}) 40... Rd1+ 41. Kg2 R1d7 $1 ({
not my early cooperative variation} 41... Qd5+ $2 42. f3 Rd3 {because of} 43.
Qc5 $1 Qxc5 44. bxc5 Bg7 45. Bf4+ {with crushing threats}) 42. Rxd7 Qxd7 43.
Qc5 Bg7 44. f3 Qxf7 45. Qb6+ Kc8 46. Qa6+ {gaining only a draw.}) 39. Qa2+ $6 {
A time-trouble error.} (39. Qe4+ $2 {would have been even worse:} Qb7 $1 {
(Stohl)} 40. Qxb7+ Rxb7 41. Rxb7 Kxb7 42. f7 Kc6 {, and the rook is obviously
stronger than the pawns.}) ({However,} 39. Rxd7 Qxd7 40. f7 $1 {would have
given real chances of maintaining the dynamic balance.}) 39... Kb8 40. Ba7+ {
This last (the fifth!) check on a7 proved merely to be the prelude to peace
negotiations.} ({It might seem that} 40. Qxe6 {(?)} Rd1+ 41. Kg2 {is to
White's advantage, but after} Rd6 $1 {(Stohl)} 42. Qb3 Rd3 43. Qe6 Rxe3 $1 {
the mirage is dispelled.}) 40... Kc8 $1 ({In the event of} 40... Kb7 41. Qxe6
Rxf7 42. Qxf7+ Bc7 43. Bc5 Ra8 $1 {Black also has some advantage, but after}
44. Qd5+ Qc6 45. Qd4 Qf3 46. f7 $1 Qxf7 47. Qe4+ Kb8 48. Qc6 {White is close
to equality.}) 41. Qxe6 {(4)} Qd5 $1 42. Qa6+ $1 {(2)} Qb7 $6 ({A sure sign of
fatigue - an unwillingness to get involved in the 'wild complications' after} 
42... Kd8 $1 {, although this would have left Black with some winning chances:}
43. Bb6+ Ke8 44. Rxd7 Kxd7 45. Qa7+ Ke6 46. Qe7+ Kf5 47. f7 Bg7 48. h4 Kg6 49.
b5 Qxf7 {etc.}) 43. Qc4+ {(2)} Qc7 ({It was also safe to play} 43... Kd8 44.
Rxd7+ Qxd7 (44... Kxd7 $2 45. Bc5 $1) 45. Bb6+ Bc7 (45... Ke8 $2 46. Qe2 $1)
46. Bc5 Bd6) ({but} 43... Qc7 {is more accurate, since it forces} 44. Qa6+ {
with a repetition. --- Times: 2.35-1.50. --- Thus the variation 19 Be3 Bxd5 20
Bxd5 Rxd5 21 Qe2 Nc6 22 Rfc1, which White had temporarily buried, was revived
- it turned out that after 22...Ne5! it is not White who is playing for a win,
but Black! And this practically closed the entire line with 19 Be3. ---
Meanwhile, the Moscow days flew by one after another, and the situation with
my Candidates semi-final match was not clarified at all. What could be done?
On 21st July I phoned Geidar Aliev, at that time already a member of the
Politburo, and explained the problem. He reassured me that the match would
take place. Only after this did I return to Baku.}) 1/2-1/2

[Event "?"]
[Site "?"]
[Date "????.??.??"]
[Round "?"]
[White "Fairy-tale in Niksic"]
[Black "?"]
[Result "*"]
[Annotator "Garry Kasparov"]
[PlyCount "1"]
[EventDate "1984.??.??"]
[SourceDate "2012.12.08"]

{International tournament in Niksic (23rd August - 13th September 1983): 1.
Kasparov - 11 out of 14; 2. Larsen - 9; 3-4. Spassky and Portisch - 8; 5-6.
Miles and Andersson - 7½; 7-8. Tal and Timman - 7; 9-10. Seirawan and
Ljubojevic - 6½; 11-12. Gligoric and Petrosian - 6; 13. Nikolic - 5½; 14.
Sax - 5; 15. Ivanovic - 4½.} 1. -- {You can imagine my state of mind during
the early hours of 7th August 1983. At that time in Pasadena, where it was
still 6th August, the match had 'started'. Korchnoi arrived at the hall of the
City College, shook hands with the arbiter, sat down at the chess board and
made the move 1 d4. Then he pressed his clock. According to the 'Los Angeles
Times', for the next hour he paced around the stage, with his hands clasped
behind his back and a deadpan expression on his face. He was awarded a win and
a quarter of the sum he would have received if the match had taken place.
Furthermore, he was told that he was already through to the final. --- That
appeared to be the end of it. Three days later Smyslov was also defaulted in
his match with Ribli - for his refusal to play in Abu Dhabi. The world
championship series was on the brink of collapse at the semi-final stage...
Sympathisers advised us to appeal in writing to the FIDE Congress, which was
due to be held in early October in Manila. Many were of the opinion that the
aim of the intrigue begun in May 1983 was 'to do everything possible' to
prevent Kasparov from qualifying to play Karpov. But the invisible
script-writers took the organisation of the second match too lightly 
(evidently considering neither Smyslov nor Ribli to be rivals to Karpov). Yes,
one disqualified Candidate might somehow be justified, but two - that was
going too far!} (1. -- {But in that hot month of August fate again sent me a
saving opportunity in the form of a telephone call from the prominent Yugoslav
player Milunka Lazarevic, an active chess organiser. She told me that I was
invited to Niksic for a super-tournament in honour of Svetozar Gligoric's 60th
birthday, in which all the top players of that time (apart from Karpov and
Korchnoi) were due to take part. Later it was explained to me that in this way
the organisers wanted to demonstrate their attitude to the crisis. --- Of
course, I was happy to be invited to such a tournament, and without hesitation
I agreed to play: this was a way out of my state of 'chess weightlessness'! In
terms of distinguished names, Niksic 1983 could compete with any event of
recent years. It was clear to me that things would not be easy. The fact that
I had the highest rating obliged me to play for first place, but almost half
of the participants were thinking of the same result. In addition, I was
concerned about my four-month break from play (not counting the games in July
with Tal and Beliavsky). Also, the events surrounding the semi-final matches
were hardly conducive to improving my frame of mind. True, on the other hand I
very much wanted to gain revenge for the 'defeat' in Pasadena and to convince
the world that my claims for continuing the battle for the chess crown were
justified.}) (1. -- {At a short training session, held in Moscow with Nikitin,
a general course of play in the tournament was planned. I had to quickly
readjust - a tournament has its specific nature, very different from match
play. I decided to put everything into my play, without any short draws, and
in each game to try to squeeze everything possible from the position (but
without overstepping the mark!), seeking the slightest chances even in
objectively drawn positions. This persistence, which previously was not
characteristic of me, soon bore fruit. Thanks also to the enormous store of
ideas, accumulated during the comprehensive preparations for the match with
Korchnoi, I was in 'super-human' form and from the start I crushed one
opponent after another. --- These preparations made themselves felt in the
very first round. Playing Black against the 1979 world junior champion, the
23-year-old American grandmaster Yasser Seirawan, I again chose my new opening
- the Tarrasch Defence (see the following game). In this first meeting with me
Yasser played cautiously, failed to gain the slightest advantage, and even
gave up a pawn, in order to regain it a dozen moves later in an endgame, which
was slightly better for Black thanks to his active bishop and queenside pawn
majority.}) *

[Event "83: Niksic"]
[Site "?"]
[Date "1983.08.24"]
[Round "1"]
[White "Seirawan, Y."]
[Black "Kasparov, G."]
[Result "0-1"]
[ECO "D34"]
[Annotator "Garry Kasparov"]
[PlyCount "108"]
[EventDate "1983.??.??"]
[Source "Everyman Chess"]
[SourceDate "2012.11.28"]

1. d4 d5 2. c4 e6 3. Nc3 c5 4. cxd5 exd5 5. Nf3 Nc6 6. g3 Nf6 7. Bg2 Be7 8. O-O
O-O 9. Bg5 cxd4 10. Nxd4 h6 11. Bxf6 Bxf6 12. Nb3 d4 13. Ne4 Be7 14. Rc1 Qb6
15. Nec5 Rd8 16. Rc4 Bxc5 17. Nxc5 Qxb2 18. Qc2 Qxc2 19. Rxc2 Rb8 20. Rb2 Rd6
21. Rd1 b6 22. Nb3 Bb7 23. Rbd2 Rbd8 24. Kf1 Ba6 25. Bxc6 Rxc6 26. Nxd4 Rc5 27.
Nb3 {(2) Simplification always seems the most reliable way to draw;} ({but
the knight on d4 stood well, and therefore Petrosian's recommendation} 27. Ke1
{and e2-e3 was sensible.}) 27... Rxd2 28. Rxd2 Rc7 {(3)} 29. Rd8+ {(14) 
Driving the black king away from the centre;} ({although the immediate} 29. Ke1
{was simpler, followed by Kd1, Nd4 and e2-e3.}) 29... Kh7 30. Ke1 Bc4 {(4) 
Now the rapid switching of the knight to d4 is not possible, and White begins
to experience certain difficulties.} 31. Kd2 {(3)} g6 {(6)} ({The 'routine'} 
31... Kg6 32. e4 Kf6 33. f4 Ke7 34. Rg8 g6 {, condemned by me because of} 35.
g4 {(?!) 'with counterplay on the kingside', is in fact no worse. After} Rd7+
$1 36. Kc3 Be2 {this is to the benefit of the black bishop:} 37. f5 gxf5 38.
gxf5 Rd3+ 39. Kb2 Bf3 40. e5 Be4 {etc.}) 32. Nc1 {(16) The first
mini-achievement by Black - the knight has temporarily taken up a poor
position.} (32. e4 Kg7 33. f4 {was also possible, only if} h5 {White must not
play} 34. h3 $6 {because of the reply} Be6 $1 {, preventing the creation of a
mobile pawn chain.}) 32... Kg7 {(3)} 33. a3 {(2)} Kf6 {(2)} 34. e3 $6 {(4) An
unforced weakening of the d3-square, making it harder for the knight to come
out.} (34. Nd3 Ke7 35. Rd4 {was definitely better, when Black's position is
the more pleasant, but he is unable to undertake anything concrete.}) 34... Ke7
{(2)} 35. Rd4 {Of course, White did not want to concede the d-file, but on the
threshold of time-trouble it was hardly correct to allow the exchange of rooks,
making the superiority of the bishop over the knight more perceptible.} Rd7 {
(7) A purely practical chance: I sensed that it might not turn up again.} ({
Apparently,} 35... b5 {was objectively somewhat stronger, keeping the rooks on,
but then White would not have had any particular problems in achieving a draw!
In changing the type of endgame, I took account of the fact that now, towards
the end of the fifth hour of play, my opponent would have to reject play on
general grounds, calculate specific variations and take some responsible
decisions. And Seirawan became anxious...}) 36. Kc3 Rxd4 37. Kxd4 b5 38. Nd3 {
(15) After spending nearly all his remaining time, White took the risk of
allowing a pawn endgame, which at the board was impossible to calculate to the
end.} ({But playing with a knight cut off on c1 was even more unpleasant: after
} 38. Kc5 {apart from} Ke6 ({there is even} 38... a6 {, since} 39. Kb6 $2 Kd6
40. Kxa6 {is not possible on account of} b4+)) ({while after} 38. a4 a6 39.
axb5 axb5 {Black would have gained an outside passed pawn and a pawn endgame.
Then} 40. Nd3 Bxd3 41. Kxd3 {would have led to a depressing queen endgame:} Kd6
42. Kd4 f5 43. f3 Kc6 44. e4 fxe4 45. Kxe4 Kc5 46. Kd3 b4 47. h4 (47. f4 $2 h5
$1 {and wins}) 47... Kd5 48. h5 gxh5 49. Kc2 Kd4 50. Kb3 Ke3 51. f4 h4 52. f5
hxg3 53. f6 g2 54. f7 g1=Q 55. f8=Q Qb1+ 56. Kc4 Qe4+ 57. Kb3 {- according to
the Tablebase, this is a draw, but after} Qf4 ({or} 57... Qd5+ 58. Kxb4 h5 {a
human player still has some work to do.})) 38... Bxd3 39. Kxd3 Kd6 {(10) Here
Seirawan glanced at the clock (his flag was threatening to fall) and grabbed
hold of his e-pawn.} 40. e4 $4 {The last move before the time control proves
to be a decisive mistake!} (40. Kd4 $1 {was essential, when the pawn endgame
is drawn, despite the possibility of Black creating an outside passed pawn on
the queenside:} f5 {it was this move that my opponent was afraid of;} ({if} 
40... g5 {, then} 41. f3 ({or} 41. f4 {and e3-e4 is sufficient})) 41. f4 a5 ({
or} 41... h5 42. e4 fxe4 43. Kxe4 Kc5 44. h3 a5 45. g4 {with a draw (} h4 46.
f5 gxf5+ 47. gxf5 Kd6 48. Kd4 $1 {)}) 42. e4 $1 fxe4 43. Kxe4 Kc5 44. g4 {.
--- It seemed to Yasser that with his pawn on e4 White had nothing to fear,
but he did not take into account that this was true only with the black pawn
on g6, where it assists the creation of a white passed pawn.}) 40... g5 $1 {(6)
The threat of ...g5-g4 practically forces the next move, which White sealed:
here the game was adjourned. In a brief analysis (the resumption began two
hours after the end of the round) I quickly established a winning plan,
typical of pawn endings with an outside passed pawn.} 41. f4 {(22)} gxf4 {(6)}
42. gxf4 Kc5 {The winning plan is quite simple - to divert the white king with
the passed pawn, after which White's pawns in the centre will become
indefensible. But with a clever defence Seirawan succeeds in making things
difficult for Black.} 43. Kc3 a5 44. Kd3 {(2)} h5 $1 {(4) It is useful to
advance the h-pawn as far as possible.} 45. h4 $1 {(13)} ({Marking time with} 
45. Kc3 {is altogether hopeless in view of} b4+ 46. axb4+ axb4+ 47. Kd3 (47.
Kb3 Kd4) 47... h4 $1 {, when it is time to resign:} 48. e5 ({while if} 48. f5)
({or} 48. h3 {, then} f6 $1) 48... Kd5 {.}) 45... b4 {(8)} 46. a4 {White
reconciles himself to the creation of a protected passed pawn;} ({since} 46.
axb4+ axb4 {is completely bad for him.}) 46... f6 $1 {(8)} ({Of course, not} 
46... b3 $2 47. Kc3 b2 48. Kxb2 Kd4 49. Kb3 $1 Kxe4 50. Kc4 Kxf4 51. Kb5 {and
Kxa5 (Seirawan).}) 47. f5 $1 {White has completed the construction of an
unusual 'fortress'.} Kc6 $1 ({Again, as on the previous move, little is
promised by} 47... b3 $2 48. Kc3 b2 49. Kxb2 Kd4 50. Kb3 $1 Kxe4 51. Kc4 Kxf5
52. Kb5 Kg4 53. Kxa5 f5 54. Kb4 {(b6)} f4 55. a5 f3 56. a6 f2 57. a7 f1=Q 58.
a8=Q {leads to a queen endgame with an h-pawn, which theory assesses as drawn.
--- But Black has available a plan involving the creation of a zugzwang
position. For this he needs to give his opponent the move, which is achieved
with the help of the distant opposition. I had already used this method in an
earlier game with Alburt (Game No.28).}) 48. Kc4 Kc7 $1 49. Kd3 (49. Kd4 {is
bad because of} Kd6 {.}) 49... Kd7 $1 {The black king has described a triangle,
and it is now ready for the victorious march to c5. White is in zugzwang (50
Kc4 Kc6).} 50. Ke3 {(11)} Kc6 51. Kd3 Kc5 {(that's it: the white king is
forced to make way)} 52. Ke3 b3 (52... Kc4 $2 53. e5 $1 {with a draw.}) 53. Kd3
Kb4 54. e5 Ka3 $1 {. The b-pawn queens. --- Times: 3.22-2.52.} 0-1

[Event "84: Niksic"]
[Site "?"]
[Date "1983.08.25"]
[Round "2"]
[White "Kasparov, G."]
[Black "Petrosian, T."]
[Result "1-0"]
[ECO "A93"]
[Annotator "Garry Kasparov"]
[PlyCount "101"]
[EventDate "1983.??.??"]
[Source "Everyman Chess"]
[SourceDate "2012.11.28"]

{My 2nd round game with Tigran Petrosian had an uneven rhythm. On this
occasion against 1 d4 the ex-world champion chose an unusual opening for him,
about which he himself once said: 'If you see that your opponent wants to play
the Dutch Defence, for God's sake, don't stop him!' Petrosian's enormous
practical strength and experience enabled him to solve his opening problems
and almost seize the initiative. But in a tense struggle my formidable
opponent felt uncomfortable, and as a result the initiative ended up on my
side. Petrosian cleverly sacrificed a pawn, but I returned the favour,
initiating a lively tactical skirmish. --- The main events took place in a
time scramble. On the 32nd move Black could have given up queen for rook and
knight with good chances of setting up a fortress. Instead of this he forced
the exchange of queens, relying on the limited remaining material in a
slightly inferior endgame.} 1. d4 e6 2. c4 f5 3. g3 Nf6 4. Bg2 d5 5. Nf3 Be7 6.
O-O O-O 7. b3 c6 8. Qc2 Bd7 9. Bb2 Be8 10. Ne5 Nbd7 11. Nd3 Bh5 12. Nc3 Bd6 13.
f3 Bg6 14. e3 Rc8 15. Qe2 Re8 16. Qf2 a6 17. Rac1 Qe7 18. Rfe1 Qf8 19. Rcd1
dxc4 20. bxc4 c5 21. Bf1 Bf7 22. Na4 cxd4 23. exd4 b5 24. cxb5 axb5 25. Nac5 b4
26. Rc1 Qe7 27. Bh3 Qd8 28. Nxb4 Qa5 29. Nc6 Qxa2 30. Nxd7 Nxd7 31. d5 Qxd5 32.
Red1 Bc5 33. Rxd5 Bxf2+ 34. Kxf2 exd5 35. Bxf5 Nb6 36. Bxc8 Nxc8 {Strictly
speaking, this is a draw, but White can still fight for a win. Such a
development of events would not have been surprising, had we exchanged places.
But, young and proud as I was, and accustomed to looking for mating attacks,
in Niksic I played on to the end in simple positions, and so here too I tried
to exploit the minimal winning chances against the great master of defence.}
37. Ba3 $1 h6 38. Rb1 {Continuing to play for the restriction of the black
pieces and preparing to invade with the rook.} Re6 $1 {In order to release the
knight on c8 - a similar sufferer to the knight at c1 from the previous
endgame with Seirawan.} 39. Nd4 Ra6 40. Bc5 Nd6 ({Earlier I condemned this
last move before the time control, parrying the threat of Rb8, and suggested
trying to dislodge the bishop from c5 by} 40... Ra5 $5 {. And indeed,} 41. Rc1
{, allows the activation} ({while after} 41. Rb5 Rxb5 42. Nxb5 Be8 43. Nc7 Bc6
44. Ke3 Kf7 {White's slight advantage is hardly enough for a win}) 41... Na7 {
and ...Nb5!. But 40...Nd6 is a natural and quite good choice. Its only
drawback is that White retains a more complicated position, and with it
certain practical chances of playing for a win.}) 41. Rb8+ {(2) Here the game
was adjourned and Petrosian sealed his next move. The resumption was due to
take place immediately after dinner. Feeling sceptical about my winning
chances, I did not bother to spend much time on analysis and I went down to
the restaurant. Nearly all the tournament contestants were there and, as usual,
they were discussing the games that had been played. Spassky asked me about
the adjourned position: 'Well, how does it look?' I replied with
disappointment: 'It would appear that I've lost my advantage.' And I began
giving vent to my grief about the forthcoming 'annoying' draw. But suddenly he
said: 'Come on, things are not so simple! The bishops are of opposite colour,
and that is in White's favour: he can create an attack. And look! Petrosian
hasn't come down for dinner - that means he doesn't like his position.' And I
began looking at the adjourned position with new eyes! Thus one sentence by an
experienced fighter replaced a whole lecture on psychology. Yes, Spassky
probably knew better than anyone the habits of his historic opponent... --- I
promptly went up to my room, began analysing the adjourned position, and
quickly ascertained that it was not so unpromising for me and that Black faced
an unpleasant defence - he would have to play extremely accurately.} Kh7 {(10)}
42. g4 $1 {White takes control of the f5-square and at the same time prepares
a shelter for his king. There is an obvious difference in the strength of the
opposite-colour bishops: White's is successfully restricting the mobility of
the black knight and is ready (together with the rook and knight) to take part
in an attack on the g7-point, whereas it is hard for Black's to find
employment. Also important is White's firm control of d4, which has become a
transit point for his minor pieces. All this did not appeal to Petrosian...}
Ra4 {(4) Black begins threatening White's forces in the centre, preventing
him from carrying out a favourable regrouping.} ({He could also have considered
} 42... h5 43. g5 Nc4) ({or the immediate} 42... Nc4 43. Rb7 Ne5 ({but not} 
43... Kg8 $6 44. Nf5 {with the threat of Bd4}) 44. Kg3 Nd3 $1 {with the
possible idea of giving up the d5-pawn, but arranging the pieces better.
However, it is unclear whether this is sufficient for a draw, and so Petrosian
looks for other, simpler ways to reach the haven of a draw. The difficulty of
the defence is that for the moment White has no direct threats, and it is not
altogether clear what to defend against (although Black's fears are most
probably exaggerated).}) 43. Ke3 $1 {(5)} Nc4+ {(5)} 44. Kf4 {A critical
moment. Here I realised for sure that Petrosian was extremely unhappy with his
position, and on seeing this I began playing far more confidently. Petrosian
noticed this change in me - and almost immediately he made a mistake.} g5+ $2 {
(4) An irreparable strategic mistake. It is not possible to create real
threats against the white king, and the weakening of the squares on the
kingside proves fatal.} ({Black should have tried to exploit the insecure
placing of the white minor pieces, in order to fight for the d4-point:} 44...
Na3 45. Kg3 (45. Rb7 Nc2 $1) 45... Nc2 $5 ({and now not} 45... Rc4 46. Rb7 $1
Kg8 (46... Rxc5 $2 47. Rxf7 Kg6 48. Rxg7+ $1) 47. Ba7 Nc2 48. Nf5 {with a
dangerous initiative}) 46. Nxc2 Rc4 47. Nd4 Rxc5 48. Rb7 Kg8 49. Nf5 h5 {,
exchanging another pair of pawns.}) (44... Nd6 45. Rb6 $1 Nc4 $5 ({after} 45...
Rc4 46. Rxd6 Rxc5 47. Rd7 Kg8 48. h4 {Black's defence is more difficult}) 46.
Rb7 Kg8 47. Rb8+ Kh7 48. Kg3 h5 {with drawing chances (} 49. g5 $6 Ne5 {)}) (
44... Ra5 45. Rb7 Kg8 46. Bb4 Ra2 47. h4 Rb2 48. Nf5 Rb3 {, and the pin on the
bishop hinders White's plans}) (44... h5 {with the idea after} 45. h3 hxg4 46.
hxg4 {of choosing one of the three lines given above. --- But, in any event,
Black's position is much more unpleasant than it appeared at first sight. And,
not wishing to conduct a prolonged and passive defence, Petrosian decided to
force matters.}) 45. Kg3 ({Of course, not} 45. Kf5 $4 Ra6 $1 46. Rb7 Kg7 $1 {
with the murderous threat of ...Rf6 mate.}) 45... Ra2 {(2) It may seem that
Black is alright - the threat of ...Ne3(d2) looks dangerous. But White,
exploiting his numerical superiority in fighting units, launches an attack.}
46. Rb7 {(7)} Kg6 $6 {There is no longer any way of saving the game;} ({
although White's task would have been made more difficult by the clever} 46...
Ne3 $1 47. Bd6 $1 {defending h2;} (47. Rxf7+ $4 Kg6) 47... Kg8 ({or} 47... Kg6
$2 48. h4 $1) 48. h4 $1 gxh4+ (48... Nc4 49. Bc5 $1) 49. Kxh4 Nc4 (49... Ra8
50. Nc6 $1) 50. Bf4 {, winning the h6-pawn and the game.}) 47. Nf5 {(12)} Ra6 {
(7) It is hard to talk about the best practical chance in a hopeless position
(except perhaps the opponent's presumption?!).} ({If} 47... Rb2 48. Ra7 Nd2 {
(threatening ...Nf1+ and ...Rxh2 mate), then simply} 49. Bf2 d4 50. Ra6+ Kh7
51. Rxh6+ Kg8 52. Rh8+ $1 Kxh8 53. Bxd4+ {and Bxb2.}) ({And the immediate} 
47... Nd2 {would have been refuted after} 48. Rb6+ Kh7 49. Rxh6+ Kg8 {by the
aforementioned manoeuvre} 50. Bd6 $1 {, for example:} Nf1+ 51. Kh3 Re2 52. Nd4
Re8 53. Ba3 {etc. --- Now, however, White's main objective is not to be
confused by the mass of tempting continuations.}) 48. h4 {(9)} ({Not the only
way (} 48. Bd4) ({or even} 48. Ne7+ {is also good), but the clearest one to
the goal.}) 48... gxh4+ 49. Nxh4+ Kg7 ({Or} 49... Kf6 50. Bd4+ Ke6 51. Nf5 {,
and the black king is in a mating net.}) 50. Nf5+ Kg6 {(4)} 51. Bd4 {(2)} ({
The threat is Nh4+, and the bishop is inevitably lost after} 51. Bd4 Nd6 52.
Nxd6 Rxd6 53. f4 {. Times: 3.07-3.08. --- This equalised the score in my
individual games with 'Iron Tigran' (2-2), but at that, alas, our duels came
to an end.}) 1-0

[Event "85: Niksic"]
[Site "?"]
[Date "1983.08.27"]
[Round "4"]
[White "Kasparov, G."]
[Black "Portisch, L."]
[Result "1-0"]
[ECO "E12"]
[Annotator "Garry Kasparov"]
[PlyCount "69"]
[EventDate "1983.??.??"]
[Source "Everyman Chess"]
[SourceDate "2012.11.28"]

{In the 3rd round I had Black against Sax and I gained a draw in a sharp line
of the Scheveningen Variation with castling on opposite sides. Then in the 4th
round I was fortunate enough to test successfully a strong piece of home
preparation against Lajos Portisch, and carry out one of the most brilliant
combinations in my career.} 1. d4 Nf6 2. c4 e6 3. Nf3 b6 4. Nc3 Bb7 (4... c5 {
- Game Nos. 32, 68.}) 5. a3 d5 (5... Ne4 {- Game No.61.}) 6. cxd5 Nxd5 7. e3 {
(3)} ({On this occasion I gave the expected} 7. Qc2 {a respite (Game Nos. 73,
75, 98).}) 7... Nxc3 {(5)} ({Black chooses the usual course, just in case
avoiding the line which had been tried at the recent European Team
Championship:} 7... Be7 8. Bb5+ c6 9. Nxd5 $5 Qxd5 10. Bd3 O-O 11. Qc2 {
(Miles-Portisch, Plovdiv 1983).}) 8. bxc3 Be7 9. Bb5+ c6 10. Bd3 c5 (10... Nd7
{- Game No.43.}) 11. O-O Nc6 (11... O-O 12. Qc2 $1 {- Game No.52.}) 12. Bb2 {
(4) The most popular plan: first White comfortably deploys his pieces and
only then does he begin action in the centre, retaining a choice between e3-e4
and c3-c4.} ({Earlier they played} 12. e4 O-O 13. Be3 cxd4 14. cxd4 Rc8 15. Qe2
(15. Ra2 $6 Bf6 {, Kasparov-Karolyi, Dortmund 1980}) 15... Na5 16. Rfe1 {, and
here it is not easy for White to achieve any real gains even after} (16. Rfd1
Rc3 $1) 16... Kh8 {(Kasparov-Groszpeter, Graz 1981)} ({or} 16... Qd6 {
(Kasparov-Najdorf, Bugojno 1982)}) ({but the most convincing is} 16... Rc3 $1 {
(cf. 'Revolution in the 70s' p.285).})) 12... Rc8 {(11) Opening trickery;} ({
Black first develops his rook, again avoiding the variation} 12... O-O 13. Qc2
{.}) 13. Qe2 {(6)} ({The immediate} 13. e4 {is effective only in the event of}
O-O $6 ({or} 13... Bf6 $6 14. d5 $1 exd5 15. exd5 Qxd5 16. Re1+ {with a strong
initiative (Kasparov-Ivkov, Bugojno 1982)}) ({but after} 13... cxd4 14. cxd4
Bf6 $1 {Black is alright (} 15. Qe2 Bxd4 $1 {)}) 14. d5 $1 {.}) 13... O-O 14.
Rad1 {(3) One of the tabiyas of the Queen's Indian Defence with 4 a3, which
at that time was subjected to a thorough analysis. In my youth I was convinced
that White had a clear advantage here, but subsequent practice did not confirm
this.} Qc7 {Incautiously repeating the recent game Polugayevsky-Portisch 
(Plovdiv 1983), where after 15 e4?! Na5 16 h3 the players agreed a draw,
leaving an interesting possibility off-stage.} (14... cxd4 $1 {is correct:} 15.
cxd4 $1 (15. exd4 {is weaker in view of} Bf6 $1 16. c4 Na5 17. Ne5 Bxe5 $1 18.
dxe5 Qc7 {, Kasparov-Tukmakov, Kislovodsk 1982}) 15... Bf6 16. e4 $5 {(this
problematic position can also arise in the variation with 7 Qc2)} Na5 {, and
here White has played both the solid} (16... g6 $6 17. h4 $1 {,
Portisch-Christiansen, London 1982}) 17. Rfe1 ({and the pawn sacrifice} 17. h4
$5 {, with interesting play and some initiative.})) 15. c4 $1 {(5) Here is my
novelty! The position has taken on new colours: d4-d5 is threatened, and the
powerful white bishops begin raking the opponent's practically undefended
kingside. Here Portisch stopped to think. It is strange that he did not
anticipate this: after all, I had already tried to do something similar in my
game with Tukmakov, but, alas, unsuccessfully (cf. the previous note).} cxd4 $2
{(12) This seemingly natural exchange - an attempt to fight against White's
'hanging' pawn centre - is already virtually the decisive mistake!} (15... Bf6
$2 {was also unsuitable:} 16. d5 $1 Ne5 (16... Bxb2 $2 17. dxc6) 17. Nxe5 Bxe5
18. Bxh7+ $1 {etc.}) ({In 'The Test of Time' I recommended} 15... Na5 $1 {,
but I assumed that after} 16. d5 $1 {all the same White had promising play,
having in mind the line given earlier in 'Informator':} exd5 17. cxd5 c4 $1 (
17... Bxd5 $2 {is worse in view of} 18. Bxh7+ Kxh7 19. Rxd5) 18. Bf5 -- (18...
Rcd8 {(?!)} 19. e4 {with advantage, but here Black has better saving chances
than with the game continuation.}) ({. However, a key defensive idea went
unnoticed -} 18... c3 $1 19. Bxc8 (19. Rc1 $6 Qc4 $1) 19... Qxc8 20. Ba1 (20.
d6 Bf6 $1 {is completely unclear}) 20... Ba6 {(immediately regaining the
exchange)} 21. Qc2 Bxf1 22. Rxf1 Bxa3 {with double-edged, roughly equal play.
--- Now, however, it will be very difficult for Black to curb the rampant
bishop on b2.})) 16. exd4 Na5 {(3)} 17. d5 $1 {(3) The white pieces are ready
to attack, and after the breakthrough in the centre Black's plan suffers a
fiasco.} exd5 $6 {(18) This loses practically by force.} (17... Qf4 18. Ne5 $1
{was also dangerous}) ({but there was the more resilient} 17... Nxc4 18. Qe4 $1
g6 19. Bxc4 Qxc4 20. Qe5 f6 21. Qxe6+ Rf7 22. Rc1 Qa6 23. d6 $1 {, and here
not my earlier suggestion} Rxc1 $2 (23... Bd8 $2 24. Ng5 $1) ({but} 23... b5 $1
24. Rfd1 Bf8 {, after which real winning chances are retained only by the
unexpected supporting of the passed d6-pawn -} 25. Be5 $1 {(Stohl)}) 24. Rxc1
Bd8 25. Ng5 $1 fxg5 26. Rc7 $1 Bxc7 27. Qe5 {with unavoidable mate.}) 18. cxd5
Bxd5 ({After} 18... g6 19. Rfe1 {the weakness of the a1-h8 diagonal causes
Black's downfall.}) 19. Bxh7+ $1 ({Disregarding a 'tedious' way to win -} 19.
Nd4 g6 20. Nf5 $1 Rfe8 21. Be5 $1 Bf8 (21... Qd8 $2 22. Be4) 22. Bxc7 Rxe2 23.
Bxe2 Be6 24. Nd4 Rxc7 25. Nxe6 fxe6 26. Bg4 Kf7 27. Rfe1 Bxa3 28. Bxe6+ Kf6 29.
Rd7 {with a technically won endgame.}) 19... Kxh7 20. Rxd5 Kg8 {(4) The only
way of prolonging the resistance.} (20... Qc2 $2 {was completely bad:} 21. Qe5
Bf6 (21... f6 22. Qxe7 Qxb2 23. Rd7 {, mating}) 22. Qh5+ Kg8 23. Bxf6 gxf6 24.
Rf5 {and wins.}) ({At this point I thought for a long time. White's pieces are
ideally placed, but nothing concrete is immediately apparent. One senses that
he should play actively, but how? Knight moves suggest themselves, but at g5
the knight is not doing anything -} 20... Kg8 21. Ng5 $2 Qc4 $1 ({but not
Stohl's move} 21... Bxg5 {(?) because of} 22. Bxg7 $1) 22. Qh5 Qc2 23. h4 Rc6
24. Rc1 Qg6 {, while after 21 Ne5? the fine-looking bishop on b2 remains out
of play (21...Qc2!). But what if it is given up? Yes, yes, sacrifice it, so
that the knight on e5 should not worry that it is blocking the bishop's path!
A unique situation: I suddenly realised that the bishop on b2 was of equal
value to the g7-pawn, and its sacrifice would carry out the set strategic
objective without loss of time.}) 21. Bxg7 $5 {(27) Previously this move -
sacrificing the second bishop! - was invariably accompanied by two exclamation
marks. White's entire combinative attack was considered exemplary, and I was
very proud of it.} ({But when modern computers joined the chess analysis, it
turned out that White had two other worthy candidate moves:} 21. Nd2 $5 {(the
start of a melancholic dance by the knight)} -- (21... Qb7 22. Rh5 Qd7 23. Ne4
Nc4 24. Bf6 $3 gxf6 25. Rh3 $1 Qf5 26. Rf3 $1 Qg6 27. Rg3 {and wins}) (21...
Qc2 $2 22. Bxg7 $1) ({, or} 21... Qc6 22. Rxa5 {and Qxe7 is worse for Black}) (
{, or} 21... Rcd8 {(the most resilient)} 22. Rh5 $1 Qd6 ({after} 22... Qd7 $2
23. Nf3 Nc6 24. Qc2 f5 25. Nh4 $1 Bxh4 26. Qc4+ {Black succumbs to the attack})
23. Qg4 Qg6 24. Qh3 f5 25. Nf3 $1 Nc6 26. Re1 Qg4 27. Rh7 Bf6 28. Bxf6 Qxh3 29.
Rxg7+ Kh8 30. Rg3+ Rxf6 31. Rxh3+ Kg7 32. Ng5 {with an extra pawn in the
ending and excellent winning chances})) (21. Rh5 $1 Qc2 ({if} 21... Rfe8 $2 {
, then} 22. Bxg7 $1 Kxg7 23. Ne5 {is now immediately conclusive}) 22. Qxe7 Qxb2
23. Ne5 $1 {- a computer move, sharply improving the earlier 'thorough'
analysis. Black has a difficult choice:} -- (23... Qd4 24. g3 $1 ({after the
showy} 24. Ng6 $6 {there is the stupendous counter} Qxf2+ $3 25. Kxf2 fxg6+ $1
26. Kg3 gxh5 27. Rxf8+ Rxf8 28. Qxa7 Rf6 29. Kh4 Rh6 {, when Black most
probably has a fortress!}) 24... Qd8 (24... Rce8 25. Qd7 $1) 25. Qb4 Rc7 26.
Qg4 $1 g6 27. Nxg6 $1 fxg6 28. Qxg6+ Rg7 29. Qe6+ Rgf7 (29... Rff7 30. Rc1 $1)
30. Qg4+ Rg7 31. Qh3 $1 {with a winning attack}) (23... Rc1 24. g4 $1 {(a far
from obvious pawn advance)} Rxf1+ 25. Kxf1 Qb1+ 26. Kg2 Qe4+ 27. Kh3 $1 {
(hiding from the checks)} Qb1 28. Rf5 $1 {(this removal of the rook from its
aggressive position is also unlikely to occur to everyone)} Qb3+ (28... Qf1+ {
is hopeless in view of} 29. Kh4 $1 Qg2 30. h3 $1) 29. f3 Qe6 30. Rxf7 Qxe7 31.
Rxe7 {, and White has a won endgame. --- But, it will be agreed, the human 21
Bxg7!? is far more spectacular - and, as we will see, effective enough. The
positional bishop sacrifice completely exposes the black king, and the
remaining white pieces become furiously active.})) 21... Kxg7 22. Ne5 $1 {
White has just one pawn for the piece and no direct threats, but he is
excellently placed - largely thanks to the 'bad' knight on a5.} Rfd8 {(16) 
The only chance.} ({Black would have lost quickly after both} 22... f5 $2 23.
Rd7 Qc5 24. Nd3) ({and} 22... Rh8 $2 23. Qg4+ Kf8 24. Qf5 f6 25. Re1 $1 Nc6 (
25... Rh6 26. Qe6 $1) 26. Nd7+ Kf7 27. Rxe7+ $1) ({as well as} 22... Qc2 $2 23.
Qg4+ Kh7 24. Rd3) ({or} 22... Rcd8 $2 23. Nd7 $1 Qc6 24. Qe5+ f6 (24... Kh6 25.
Rd3 $1) 25. Qxe7+ Rf7 26. Rg5+ $1 fxg5 27. Qxg5+ Qg6 28. Qxd8 Qf5 29. Nb8 {.})
23. Qg4+ {(14)} Kf8 24. Qf5 $1 {(6) This visibly distressed Portisch;} ({he
had reckoned only on} 24. Nd7+ {(?)} Rxd7 25. Rxd7 Qc4 $1 {with unclear play.})
24... f6 {(36) Again the only move.} ({Black is forced to weaken his king's
defences still further, as otherwise disaster awaits him:} 24... Bd6 $2 25. Qf6
$1 Nc4 (25... Kg8 26. Nd7 $1) 26. Ng6+ Ke8 27. Re1+ Kd7 28. Re7+ (28. Rh5 $5))
({or} 24... Bxa3 $2 25. Nd7+ Rxd7 26. Rxd7 Qc4 27. Rfd1 Nc6 ({or} 27... Re8)
28. Qf6 $1 {and wins.}) 25. Nd7+ {(2)} ({Earlier I condemned} 25. Ng6+ {(!?)}
Kg7 ({of course, not} 25... Ke8 $2 26. Qh5 ({or} 26. Re1)) 26. Nf4 $1 Rxd5 27.
Nxd5 (27. Qg6+ $2 Kh8 28. Ne6 {is bad in view of} Rg5 $1) 27... Qe5 $1 ({if} 
27... Qc5 $2 {, then} 28. Qg4+ $1 Kf7 29. Nxe7 Kxe7 30. Qg7+ Kd6 31. Rd1+ {is
decisive}) 28. Nxe7 Qxf5 29. Nxf5+ Kh8 {, thinking that White has 'nothing
special', but in fact it would also have given good winning chances:} 30. g4 $1
Rc4 31. h3 Ra4 32. Re1 $1 Rxa3 (32... Nc4 33. Re6) 33. Re8+ Kh7 34. Re7+ Kg8
35. Rg7+ Kh8 36. Rxa7 Rxh3 37. Rf7 {etc.}) 25... Rxd7 {(2)} 26. Rxd7 Qc5 $6 {
In the end Portisch was worn out by the difficult defence.} (26... Qe5 $1 {was
more resilient, although here too after} 27. Qh3 $1 {White has a strong attack
with equal material (rook and pawn against bishop and knight):} f5 ({or} 27...
Rc7 28. Rd3 f5 29. Qh6+ Qg7 30. Qh5 $1 f4 (30... Qf7 31. Qh8+ {and Qe5}) 31.
Re1 Nb7 32. g3 $1 {, and Black is most probably unable to hold out}) 28. Qh6+
Kg8 29. Rd3 $1 f4 (29... Rc3 {leads to the loss of the f5-pawn}) 30. Qg6+ Kf8
31. Rg3 $3 Bf6 32. Qg8+ Ke7 33. Qh7+ Ke6 34. Rd1 $1 Rd8 35. Rgd3 Rxd3 36. Qxd3
{.}) 27. Qh7 $1 {(19)} Rc7 {(4)} 28. Qh8+ $1 {(2)} ({Avoiding the trap for
which Portisch was hoping:} 28. Rd3 $2 Qxf2+ $3 29. Kxf2 (29. Rxf2 $2 Rc1+)
29... Bc5+ 30. Kg3 Rxh7 31. Rxf6+ Ke7 {, when the endgame is now rather more
pleasant for Black.}) 28... Kf7 29. Rd3 Nc4 {(9) A belated return of the
knight.} (29... Nc6 30. Rg3 Ke6 31. Qg8+ Kd7 32. Rd1+ Bd6 33. Rgd3 {(Stohl)
was even worse}) ({while if} 29... Bf8 {White would decide matters with} 30.
Qh7+ Bg7 31. h4 ({or} 31. Rfd1 {.})) 30. Rfd1 $1 {(10) An important move,
connecting the rooks for combined actions.} Ne5 {A final error;} ({but Black
would also not have saved the game by} 30... Bd6 31. Rf3 $1 ({rather more
forceful than my earlier} 31. Rd5) ({and Nunn's move} 31. Rh3) 31... Qg5 32.
Rh3 $1 {with crushing threats}) ({or} 30... Nd6 31. Rg3 Ke6 32. Re3+ Kd7 33.
Qg7 Kd8 34. Qg8+ Kd7 35. Re6 Qc1 (35... Qxa3 36. Rdxd6+ $1) 36. Ree1 Qc5 37. h4
{and wins.}) 31. Qh7+ Ke6 ({Avoiding the immediate mate (} 31... Kf8 32. Rd8+ {
), the black king sets off on its farewell journey.}) 32. Qg8+ Kf5 (32... Nf7
33. Re1+ {.}) 33. g4+ $1 Kf4 ({Or} 33... Nxg4 34. Rf3+ {.}) 34. Rd4+ Kf3 35.
Qb3+ ({In view of} 35. Qb3+ Qc3 36. Qd5+ Ke2 37. Qe4+ {. Times: 1.52-2.11.
--- This fairytale game became the highlight of the tournament; it appeared in
chess publications around the world and later it was judged to be the best in
'Informator' Volume 36. --- Inspired by this win, in the 5th round I crushed
Ljubojevic with Black and in the 6th round - Ivanovic (both resigned as early
as the 26th move).}) 1-0

[Event "86: Niksic"]
[Site "?"]
[Date "1983.09.01"]
[Round "7"]
[White "Larsen, B."]
[Black "Kasparov, G."]
[Result "0-1"]
[ECO "D34"]
[Annotator "Garry Kasparov"]
[PlyCount "112"]
[EventDate "1983.??.??"]
[Source "Everyman Chess"]
[SourceDate "2012.11.28"]

{More difficult was my 7th round game with Bent Larsen, in which numerous
interesting events occurred. After again playing the Tarrasch Defence and
employing a novelty on the 12th move, I obtained good play and soon, after an
unfortunate manoeuvre by a white knight, I gained an advantage (incidentally,
in Niksic the Tarrasch brought me 3½ out of 4!). After a mistake by my
opponent on the 22nd move I could have landed a decisive blow, but I took the
wrong course and by clever defence Larsen equalised. Although subsequently he
committed a couple of inaccuracies and I again obtained some winning chances,
the adjourned position did not give any particular grounds for optimism.
Nevertheless I decided to play on to the logical end.} 1. c4 e6 2. Nc3 d5 3. d4
c5 4. cxd5 exd5 5. Nf3 Nc6 6. g3 Nf6 7. Bg2 Be7 8. O-O O-O 9. b3 Ne4 10. Bb2
Bf6 11. Na4 Re8 12. Rc1 b6 13. dxc5 Bxb2 14. Nxb2 bxc5 15. Na4 Ba6 16. Re1 c4
17. Nh4 Qa5 18. Nf5 g6 19. Nd4 Rac8 20. h4 Ne5 21. Bh3 Rc7 22. Nc2 cxb3 23.
axb3 Bc8 24. Bg2 Ng4 25. Rf1 Bd7 26. Ra1 Bxa4 27. Rxa4 Qc3 28. Bxe4 dxe4 29. e3
Qxb3 30. Rxe4 Rxe4 31. Qd8+ Kg7 32. Qxc7 Rc4 33. Nd4 Rxc7 34. Nxb3 Rc2 35. Nd4
Ra2 36. e4 Rd2 37. Nc6 a6 38. e5 Re2 39. Ra1 Rxf2 40. Rxa6 Rc2 {The drawbacks
of White's position are obvious: the king cut off on the back rank and pawn
weaknesses at e5 and g3. But Black is seriously short of fighting units to be
able to exploit these factors effectively.} 41. h5 {(6) With this sealed move,
which suggests itself after five hours of intense play, Larsen provokes
another exchange, but again makes things more difficult for himself.} ({A draw,
especially after home analysis, would have resulted from} 41. e6 $1 fxe6 42.
Nd4 Rc1+ 43. Kg2 e5 44. Ne6+ Kf6 (44... Kh6 45. Ra7) 45. Ng5+ Kf5 {- I
condemned this continuation in both 'Informator' and 'The Test of Time',
thinking that 'the activity of the black pieces is dangerous'. However, after}
46. Ra3 $1 {with the threat of Rf3 mate White is alright:} Rc2+ 47. Kg1 Nh2 (
47... e4 48. Ra5+) 48. Nxh7 Kg4 49. Ng5 {with a draw.}) (41. Rb6 $6 Ne3 $1 {.})
41... Kh6 $5 {(16) Without the help of his king Black cannot hope to achieve
anything, but for Larsen this reply came as a surprise.} ({Perhaps he was
expecting} 41... gxh5 42. Nd4 $1) ({or} 41... Ne3 42. hxg6 hxg6 43. e6 $1 fxe6
44. Nd4 Rg2+ 45. Kh1 e5 46. Nf3 e4 47. Rxg6+ {with an easy draw.}) 42. hxg6 {
(2)} hxg6 43. Ra4 {(12)} ({Again White would have been saved by} 43. e6 $1 fxe6
({instead of this, by luring the king to g5 (} 43... Ne3 44. Nd8 $1 {with a
draw), White prepares further simplification}) 44. Nd4 Rc1+ 45. Kg2 e5 46. Nf5+
Kg5 47. Nh4 $1 {, when Black cannot win:} Rc2+ 48. Kf3 Nf6 49. Ke3 Rc3+ 50. Ke2
$1 e4 (50... Rxg3 51. Nf3+) 51. Ra5+ Kg4 (51... Kh6 52. Ra6) 52. Nxg6 Rxg3 53.
Re5 {etc.}) 43... Kg5 $1 {(15)} 44. Nd4 {(2)} Rc3 ({In the event of} 44... Rc1+
45. Kg2 Nxe5 46. Nf3+ Nxf3 47. Kxf3 {a drawn rook endgame is reached.
Therefore Black tries to win the e5-pawn by more cunning means.}) 45. e6 $1 {
(9)} ({After} 45. Kg2 $6 Nxe5 {the presence of knights on the board would have
allowed Black, without the slightest risk, to try and 'starve' the opponent
into surrender (say,} 46. Ra5 Kf6 47. Ra6+ Kg7 48. Ra5 f6 49. Ra2 g5 {etc.).
Defending such a position is highly unpleasant, and so Larsen decided to
complicate the play by sacrificing his g3-pawn, hoping for a more certain draw
with an advanced e-pawn against a pair of connected passed pawns.}) 45... Rxg3+
{(3)} 46. Kh1 $6 {An inaccuracy, after which White is not yet losing, but he
again makes it harder for himself to gain a draw.} ({The natural} 46. Kf1 $1 f5
47. e7 Re3 48. Nc6 {would have solved all his problems:} Nf6 49. Ra8 Kh6 (49...
Re6 50. Rf8 $1 f4 51. Kf2 {with a draw}) 50. Kf2 f4 51. Ra4 g5 52. Ra5 Ng4+ (
52... g4 53. Rf5 {with a draw}) 53. Kf1 Re6 54. Ra8 Ne5 55. Nd4 $1 {, and
Black is unable to strengthen his position. But the king in the corner of the
board gives him an opportunity to launch a dangerous attack with his small
army.}) 46... f5 $1 {(2)} 47. e7 {(8)} Re3 {(2)} 48. Nc6 f4 $1 {(5) 
Signalling the start of the attack - the direct consequence of Kh1. The
problems, which had arisen literally out of nothing, caused even such an
experienced fighter as Larsen to become nervous. And time-trouble,
imperceptibly stealing up, did nothing to assist the concentrated working of
his mind...} 49. Ra5+ {(10)} (49. Ra8 $2 {was obviously bad:} Re1+ 50. Kg2 Re2+
$1 51. Kf3 ({or} 51. Kf1 f3 $1) ({but not} 51. Kh1 $2 f3 $1 {with a rapid mate}
) 51... Re3+ $1 52. Kg2 f3+ 53. Kf1 Re2 54. Rf8 (54. e8=Q $2 Nh2+ 55. Kg1 f2+)
54... Ne3+ 55. Kg1 f2+ 56. Rxf2 Re1+ 57. Kh2 Ng4+ 58. Kg3 Nxf2 59. Kxf2 Re6 {
and wins.}) ({A study on the theme of interference was also extremely risky -} 
49. Ne5 $2 Rxe5 50. Ra5 $1 Rxa5 51. e8=Q {, since after} Rf5 52. Qd8+ Nf6 53.
Qd2 Kh6 $1 {it is hard for the queen to restrain the onslaught of the black
pawns.}) ({But, apart from the move in the game, White had two other
acceptable options:} 49. Nd4 $1 {- this paradoxical move, one which is hard to
find, was suggested after the game by Timman. Although scattered over the
entire board, the white pieces coordinate amazingly harmoniously:} Rxe7 ({or} 
49... Nf6 $1 50. Ra6 $1 Rxe7 51. Ne6+ $1 Rxe6 (51... Kg4 52. Nxf4 $1) 52. Rxe6
Kf5 53. Ra6 {, and the defence holds}) (49... Kh4 50. Kg2 $1) 50. Nf3+ Kf5 51.
Nh4+ Kf6 52. Rxf4+ Kg5 53. Nxg6 {.}) (49. Ra3 $1 {- a reliable defence, found
by me while working on this book and also not without its elegance:} Re6 50.
Ra5+ Kh4 51. Ra8 Nf6 52. Kg2 Rxc6 53. Rf8 $1 {(threatening Rxf6)} Rc2+ 54. Kf1
Rc1+ 55. Kf2 $1 Ne4+ 56. Kf3 Nd6 57. Kxf4 Rc5 58. Kf3 Re5 59. Rd8 {and Rxd6
with a draw.}) 49... Kh4 50. Ra8 $1 {(4) Already the only move;} ({White does
not succeed either with interference -} 50. Ne5 $2 Kg3 $1) ({or} 50. Re5 $2
Rh3+ $1 51. Kg1 f3) ({or diversion -} 50. Ra3 $2 Rxa3 ({his idea has become
clear: by depriving the f4-pawn of support, he has neutralised} 50... Re1+ {
(?!)} 51. Kg2 Re2+ {(?!) in view of} 52. Kf3) 51. e8=Q Re3 $1 52. Qd8+ Kh3 $1
53. Qd2 f3 $1 {and wins. On the other hand, now the black king becomes active.}
) 50... Nf6 $1 {With the threat of ...Kg3, when its white colleague is in a
mating net.} 51. Kg2 $4 {(5) A fatal error!} (51. Kh2 $1 {was essential, for
example:} Re2+ ({or} 51... f3 $1 52. e8=Q $1 Nxe8 53. Ra4+ Kh5 54. Kg3 g5 55.
Nd4 {, regaining one of the pawns and achieving a draw (although Black could
still have tormented his opponent a little)}) 52. Kg1 Kg3 53. Kf1 f3 54. Nd4 $1
Rh2 (54... Rxe7 55. Ra3 $1 {with a draw}) 55. Nxf3 Kxf3 56. Ra3+ Kf4 57. Ra6
Ne8 58. Rxg6 {with a draw.}) 51... f3+ 52. Kf1 {(2)} Kg3 53. Nd4 {(2) A
desperate and, alas, belated attempt to save the king at the cost of the
e7-pawn (53...Rxe7? 54 Ra3!).} ({Mate would have been inevitable after} 53. Rf8
Ng4 54. e8=Q Nh2+ 55. Kg1 Rxe8 {etc.}) 53... Ng4 {(5)} 54. Nxf3 ({Otherwise
the pawn cannot be stopped:} 54. e8=Q Nh2+ 55. Kg1 f2+ {.}) 54... Rxf3+ 55. Kg1
Nh2 $1 ({Avoiding the last trap:} 55... Nf2 $2 56. Rh8 $1 Ra3 57. Kf1 $1 {with
a draw.}) 56. Rf8 Rc3 ({In view of} 56... Rc3 57. Rf1 Re3 {(c8) with a rapid
mate.}) 0-1

[Event "87: Niksic"]
[Site "?"]
[Date "1983.09.03"]
[Round "8"]
[White "Kasparov, G."]
[Black "Spassky, B."]
[Result "0-1"]
[ECO "E84"]
[Annotator "Garry Kasparov"]
[PlyCount "66"]
[EventDate "1983.??.??"]
[Source "Everyman Chess"]
[SourceDate "2012.11.28"]

{My three wins in the endgame - against Seirawan, Petrosian and Larsen -
probably made no less an impression than my usual combinative attacks: the
chess world saw a 'new' Kasparov, ready to accumulate small advantages little
by little. --- In the 8th round, with 6½ points out of 7, I met Boris
Spassky, to whom I had lost in Tilburg. And, of course, I was burning with the
desire to exact revenge and continue my winning streak. The commentary to this
game, published in Volume III of 'My Great Predecessors', has had to be
substantially refined and revised.} 1. d4 Nf6 2. c4 g6 3. Nc3 Bg7 {Again a
King's Indian - this is a challenge! Well, such a turn of events suited me and
I decided to choose the Sämisch Variation, which around that time I had
examined at training sessions with Timoshchenko (true, from the black side).}
4. e4 {(7)} d6 5. f3 {(4)} Nc6 (5... O-O {- Game Nos. 51, 81.}) 6. Be3 {(9)} ({
The harmless} 6. d5 $6 Ne5 7. f4 Ned7 8. Nf3 O-O 9. Bd3 c6 {leads to equality 
(Yusupov-Spassky, Linares 1983).}) 6... a6 {(3)} 7. Nge2 (7. Qd2 Rb8 8. Rb1 {
- Game No.15.}) 7... Rb8 8. Qd2 (8. Nc1 {- Game No.12.}) (8. h4 $5 {.}) 8...
O-O (8... b5 {is more lively, although} 9. cxb5 axb5 10. d5 Ne5 11. Nd4 b4 12.
Ncb5 {promises White somewhat the better chances.}) 9. h4 {(3) Attack!} ({The
following line, which was fashionable at that time, is too insipid:} 9. Nc1 e5
10. d5 Nd4 {, and here after} 11. Nb3 ({while if} 11. N1e2 {-} c5 12. dxc6 Nxc6
) 11... Nxb3 12. axb3 {, there is the good reply} c5 {.}) 9... b5 {(11)} ({
After} 9... h5 {Spassky himself successfully played both} 10. O-O-O {against
Keene (Dortmund 1973),} ({and} 10. Bh6 {against Fischer (8th match game,
Sveti-Stefan/Belgrade 1992).})) 10. h5 {(2)} bxc4 $6 {(13) Objectively a
second-rate move;} ({but Spassky deliberately avoided the best move} 10... e5
11. d5 Na5 {: in the well-known game Timman-Kasparov (Bugojno 1982) after} 12.
Ng3 bxc4 13. O-O-O Nd7 $6 (13... Rb4 {is obviously stronger, although against
Loginov (Manila Olympiad 1992) I was able to demonstrate the plus points of
White's position:} 14. Bh6 Bxh6 15. Qxh6 Qe7 (15... Kh8 $5) 16. Be2 Bd7 17. Nf1
Rfb8 18. Rd2 c5 19. Bd1 Ne8 20. hxg6 fxg6 21. g4 {etc.}) 14. hxg6 fxg6 15. Nb1
$1 {White gained an advantage.}) ({Not} 10... Nxh5 $2 11. g4 Nf6 12. Bh6 {with
an attack.}) 11. g4 $1 {(35) The most energetic and useful move. The knight
at e2, in expectation of ...e7-e5, guards the d4-square for the moment. But
now 12 hxg6 fxg6 13 Nf4 and Qh2! is threatened.} ({The immediate} 11. hxg6 fxg6
12. Nf4 {is not so dangerous after} e6 13. Bxc4 d5 14. Bb3 Rxb3 $1 15. axb3
dxe4 16. O-O-O exf3 17. gxf3 Ne7 $1 18. Nd3 Nf5 19. Ne5 Bb7 20. Bg5 Qe8 {with
good counterplay (Weih-Spassky, Germany 1983). --- Here the ex-world champion
sank into thought...}) 11... Bxg4 $5 {(40)} ({Having seen that in the event of
} 11... e5 12. d5 {followed by Ng3 and 0-0-0 Black is deprived of any
counterplay (the g-pawn has advanced to g4!), Spassky realised that he had to
do something, since otherwise he might be suffocated and quickly mated. And he
took a decision which, from a purely chess standpoint is perhaps dubious (it
is clear that the piece sacrifice is not fully correct), but from the
practical, psychological standpoint it is the best, since it sharply changes
the character of the play. White will no longer have a direct attack, and he
has to readjust to the conversion of a material advantage, while Black
acquires some counterplay.}) 12. fxg4 Nxg4 13. O-O-O $1 {(29)} ({I think that
Spassky underestimated this reply and was reckoning on} 13. hxg6 $2 Nxe3 $1 14.
Qxe3 Rxb2 $1 15. gxf7+ Rxf7 16. Qh3 h6 17. O-O-O Qb8 $1 {with a dangerous
counterattack. White does not allow the rook to go to b2, and Black's
difficulties increase.}) 13... Nxe3 {(13)} (13... e5 {is also insufficient,
when the correct reply is not} 14. d5 ({but only} 14. hxg6 $1 fxg6 15. Bh3 Nxe3
16. Be6+ $1 Kh8 17. Qxe3 Bf6 18. Qh3 h5 19. d5 {with an obvious advantage})
14... Nd4 15. Ng1 Nxe3 16. Qxe3 c5 $1 17. Bxc4 (17. dxc6 $2 Qb6) 17... Rb4 18.
b3 Qa5 {and Black is still alive.}) 14. Qxe3 e6 $6 {A characteristic moment!} (
{After} 14... e5 $1 15. d5 (15. hxg6 fxg6) 15... Nd4 16. Nxd4 $1 exd4 17. Rxd4
Bxd4 18. Qxd4 {Black's position is not easy, but he has some counter-chances.
Spassky, however, chose a move which, though perhaps objectively indifferent,
did not fix the pawn structure and did not allow me a clear line of play: as
if to say, go on, attack, and let's see what happens...}) 15. hxg6 {(8)} hxg6 (
{The imprudent} 15... fxg6 $2 {would have lost to} 16. Qh3 $1 Qg5+ (16... Qf6
17. Qxh7+ Kf7 18. Bg2 $1 Rh8 19. Rdf1) 17. Kb1 Rxb2+ $6 (17... Rf6 18. Bg2 {is
also insufficient}) 18. Kxb2 Rb8+ 19. Ka1 Nb4 20. Qxe6+ Kh8 21. a4 $1 Nc2+ 22.
Ka2 Nb4+ 23. Kb2 {(b1) etc. After taking with the h-pawn, Black is hoping that
his g7-bishop will defend him against mate - as in the 'Dragon'!}) 16. Rd2 ({
The immediate} 16. Ng1 $1 {and Nf3 was more accurate.}) 16... Re8 $2 {(3) By
allowing the switching of the knight from e2 to f3, Black comes under an
irresistible attack.} ({However, my recommendation} 16... Qf6 {also did not
promise an easy life in view of} 17. Nf4 $1 {, when} Nxd4 $2 18. Rf2 $1 {with
the threats of Nh5 and Qh3 is bad for Black.}) 17. Ng1 $1 {(5)} d5 ({(after} 
17... e5 $6 18. d5 {the bishop on g7 is inactive)}) 18. Nf3 {(4) It is
evident that White has succeeded in unravelling his pieces and that Black has
lost any initiative. The threat of Rdh2 is imminent: White has sufficient
force to mate the enemy king.} a5 {(2) Played because everything else is
hopeless. But from this point incredible things begin to happen.} 19. e5 {(16)}
({I also calculated} 19. Rdh2 $1 -- (19... dxe4 20. Nxe4 Nxd4 21. Rh8+ $1 Bxh8
22. Rxh8+ Kxh8 23. Qh6+ Kg8 24. Nfg5 {, mating}) ({, as well as} 19... e5 20.
Nxd5 exd4 {, but here I saw that nothing was given by} 21. Rh8+ ({and I failed
to find the decisive move} 21. Qf4 $1 {. Becoming agitated, and thinking that
I could win as I pleased, I did not even bother to calculate this line to the
end and I chose 19 e5.})) ({. And it was only later, in a conversation during
a communal evening walk, that it suddenly dawned on me: hang on, after} 19...
e5 {there is the decisive} 20. Rh7 $1 exd4 21. Rxg7+ $1 Kxg7 22. Qh6+ Kf6 23.
Nxd5+ Ke6 24. Ng5+ Kd7 25. Nxf7 {etc. --- I became terribly upset - I remember
Milunka Lazarevic saying to me: 'You're just like Fischer: after a game he
also used to get in a right state!' But how couldn't I be upset? Fancy missing
such a simple win! It was staggering that I did not calculate this variation
at the board... The Tilburg story repeated itself and the diagnosis became
obvious: giving vent to my emotions, I lost my accuracy.})) 19... Ne7 $1 {(7) 
It transpires that Black has some counterplay: ...c7-c5 and ...Nf5.} 20. Bh3 {
(2)} ({Again} 20. Rdh2 $1 {(threatening 21 Rh8+!)} Nf5 21. Qf2 {was very
strong, with an overwhelming advantage - say,} c5 22. dxc5 Qc7 23. Bh3 Nh6 24.
Bxe6 $1 {.}) 20... c5 $1 21. dxc5 Qc7 {(the situation has become sharper:
White's centre has been demolished and it is more difficult for him to attack)}
22. Qf4 $2 {(3)} ({I should have gone one square further -} 22. Qg5 $1 {with
the murderous threat of Bxe6!, for example:} Qxc5 ({or} 22... Nc6 23. Bxe6 $1
fxe6 24. Qxg6 Nxe5 25. Qh7+ Kf8 26. Rf1 {, and Black's position is in ruins})
23. Bxe6 $1 fxe6 24. Qh4 {and Ng5.}) 22... Nc6 $1 {(2) Now this is a strong
move: the 'bridgehead' pawn at e5 is under attack!} ({Black would have lost
ignominiously after} 22... Qxc5 $2 23. Qxf7+ $1 Kxf7 24. Ng5+ Kf8 (24... Kg8
25. Bxe6+ Kf8 26. Nh7#) 25. Nxe6+ Kg8 26. Nxc5 {.}) 23. Re1 $6 {(2) Losing
the remnants of White's advantage.} (23. Bxe6 $1 Nxe5 24. Nxd5 Nd3+ 25. Rxd3
Qxf4+ 26. Nxf4 cxd3 27. Bd5 $1 {would still have left him with the better
chances in a sharp multi-piece ending.}) 23... d4 $1 {(5)} 24. Rxd4 {(4)} ({If
} 24. Nxd4 {I did not like} Nxe5 {, although after} 25. Kd1 $1 Qxc5 26. Ne4 {
an unclear battle could have ensued.}) 24... Nxd4 25. Nxd4 $1 {(2) This is
still correct.} (25. Qxd4 $2 Qb7 (25... Red8 $5) 26. Qf2 Bh6+ 27. Kb1 Red8 $1
28. c6 $1 (28. Na4 $2 {is bad in view of} Qb4 29. Nb6 c3 30. b3 Bd2) 28... Qxc6
{is advantageous to Black.}) 25... Qxc5 26. Nf3 $6 (26. Bg2 $1 {was better.})
26... Red8 $6 ({Missing a chance to seize the initiative by} 26... Qb6 $1 27.
Re2 Red8 28. Ng5 (28. Bg4 $6 Rd3 $1) 28... Qg1+ 29. Bf1 Rb7 {etc.}) 27. Ng5 $1
Qe7 {(3) The start of a wild time scramble.} ({After} 27... Rd7 {White would
have been unable to win even after the best move} 28. Bxe6 $1 fxe6 29. Qh2 Bh8
30. Qh6 {- it is a draw both in the event of} Qf2 ({and after} 30... Qc6 31.
Qxg6+ Rg7 32. Qh6 Rgb7 {(} 33. Rg1 $2 Qb6 $1 {)}) ({or} 30... Qb6 31. Na4 Qc6
32. Nc5 Qb6 $1) 31. Qxg6+ Kf8 32. Nxe6+ Ke7 33. Re2 Qf1+ 34. Kc2 Qf7 {(a1).})
28. Qh4 Rd3 29. Qh7+ ({Rather more practical winning chances were offered by} 
29. Nce4 $5 -- ({, with the idea of} 29... c3 $2 30. Rf1 $1 cxb2+ (30... Qb4
31. Qh7+ {, mating}) 31. Kb1 Rb6 32. Qh7+ Kf8 33. Nxf7 $1) ({, or} 29... Bxe5
$1 30. Qh7+ Kf8 31. Rf1 Bxb2+ $2 ({instead of 31...Bxb2+ it would not be easy
for him to find} 31... Rc3+ $3 32. bxc3 Qa3+ 33. Kd1 Rd8+ 34. Nd2 Rxd2+ 35.
Kxd2 Qxc3+ {with perpetual check}) 32. Kc2 f5 33. Qxg6 {, and Black has no
defence.})) 29... Kf8 30. Nxe6+ $6 {(3) Again I missed my way!} ({Here too} 
30. Nce4 $1 {would still have retained a good game:} Rxh3 $6 (30... Rxb2 $2 31.
Nxe6+ $1 {etc.}) ({or} 30... Bxe5 $1 31. Rf1 Rc3+ $3 {with the same draw as in
the previous note}) 31. Qxh3 Bxe5 32. Rf1 $1 Bxb2+ 33. Kc2 f5 34. Rb1 $1 (34.
Nc5 Bf6 $1) 34... fxe4 35. Qh6+ Ke8 36. Qxg6+ Kd7 37. Rd1+ Kc8 38. Nxe6 Rb6 39.
Qg8+ Kb7 40. Rd7+ $1 Qxd7 41. Nc5+ Kc7 42. Nxd7 Kxd7 43. Qd5+ Kc7 44. Qxa5 {
with winning chances. --- In any event, it would have been easier playing
White: Black would have had to find the only moves to save himself. But I
wanted to do everything with checks...}) 30... fxe6 31. Rf1+ Ke8 32. Qg8+ Bf8
33. Qxg6+ $2 ({The most annoying thing is that even here White could still
have saved himself with the fantastic study-like move} 33. Nd5 $3 {. For
example:} Kd7 $5 (33... exd5 34. Rxf8+ $1 Qxf8 35. Qe6+ Qe7 36. Qg8+ {with
perpetual check}) 34. Nxe7 Bh6+ 35. Kc2 Rxg8 36. Nxg8 Rxh3 37. Rd1+ $1 Kc7 (
37... Ke8 38. Nf6+) 38. Nxh6 Rxh6 39. Rd4 {with a draw (I discovered this only
later).}) 33... Kd8 $1 {White lost on time.} ({After} 33... Kd8 34. Bxe6 Qb4
35. Nd1 Qd2+ 36. Kb1 Rf3 $1 {he would have lost, although not immediately. ---
Times: 2.30-2.29. --- My only defeat in the tournament - and a highly annoying
one! Spassky again displayed remarkable resourcefulness, and although he was
inaccurate in some details, on the whole he proved more cunning (it was some
time before I was able to equalise the score in our individual games, which I
did only by defeating Spassky in Barcelona 1989 and Linares 1990).}) (33... Kd8
{. In my anger the next day I defeated Nikolic with Black (cf. Game No.55,
note to White's 45th move). Then I made draws with Tal, Miles and Andersson,
and before the end I also defeated Timman and Gligoric - and I finished two
points ahead of the 2nd placed Larsen! Nikitin: 'Here too Karpov's protectors
did their favourite a disservice: after this tournament the ratings of the two
Ks finally became equal.' --- But in Niksic for the first time I also had to
display my organisational skills. To save the matches took some doing: I
organised a letter from the grandmasters to FIDE and opened negotiations with
Korchnoi. The players in the tournament responded favourably to my request to
sign a letter demanding that the semi-final matches be held: the desire to see
them was universal (the text of the letter is given in Kasparov vs. Karpov
1975-1985). This was quite possibly the first petition in chess history to be
signed by nearly all the world's leading grandmasters. Some of them (Timman,
Seirawan and Miles) expressed surprise: 'Why didn't you go to Pasadena? How
could you risk your entire chess career just because they chose the wrong town.
..'} 34. -- {It remained to come to an understanding with Korchnoi, who could
have used his formal right to go through to the final. But 'Viktor the
Terrible' took the noble decision to replay the semi-final match, thereby
showing that his criticism of the 'championship on paper' was not just empty
words. Closer to the end of the tournament he travelled specially to Niksic.
Negotiations about the match, sanctioned by Moscow, were initially carried out
through intermediaries and proved very difficult. But the stumbling-block was
removed when it was promised that Korchnoi's chief and lawful demand would be
met - the termination of the boycott by Soviet players, begun in 1976. --- Our
personal relations were helped by the grandmaster blitz tournament in Herzeg
Novi, organised on 14th September, immediately after the main tournament in
Niksic. I won this event by a solid margin (13½ out of 16!), twice defeating
Korchnoi, who finished 2nd (10½). Possibly he was impressed by the fact that
I was willing to play with him in the same tournament, even though the
negotiations were still in progress. For him this blitz tournament was the
first breakthrough of the seven-year blockade! We were able to have several
frank talks about the coming match, which we were both impatiently awaiting.
--- Thus the 'miracle' had occurred. It was due to be completed by the FIDE
Congress in the autumn. A key role at that time was played by the English
grandmaster Raymond Keene, who in FIDE held the post of Secretary of the
Players' Union. After flying to Moscow for discussions, he was surprised when
he was met at the airport by Krogius himself, the head of the Chess Section (a
rare honour!), and when they all began vying with one another to tell him how
they were helping Kasparov (this was something new!). He stated that he could
quickly arrange both matches in London, but on condition that the Soviet side
publicly acknowledged that, in choosing Pasadena, Campo had not exceeded his
authority as FIDE President, and that they pay the required compensation. The
total penalty demanded was $160,000 - far more than the prizes in the wrecked
matches! --- The tournament in Niksic showed that my play had become deeper
and more diverse. I sensed my growing strength and realised that this was the
direct result of my serious preparation for the Candidates matches. And with
even greater enthusiasm our team continued its analytical work.}) 0-1

[Event "?"]
[Site "?"]
[Date "????.??.??"]
[Round "?"]
[White "Match with Korchnoi"]
[Black "?"]
[Result "*"]
[Annotator "Garry Kasparov"]
[PlyCount "1"]
[EventDate "1984.??.??"]
[SourceDate "2012.12.08"]

{Semi-final Candidates match Kasparov-Korchnoi (London, 20th November - 17th
December 1983): 7-4.} 1. -- {A couple of weeks after Niksic, at the very end
of September, I was invited to Barcelona to be presented with the chess
'Oscar' for the previous year, 1982 (in the preceding nine years this
prestigious prize had been won eight times by Karpov and once, in 1978, by
Korchnoi). I received 1021 votes, and Karpov 943. A remarkable feature of the
trip was that for the first time my mother was able to travel with me. It was
rare for a Soviet chess player to be allowed to take a close relative abroad
with him, and in my case this was especially important, since there were
persistent rumours that I was going to defect to the West. It is possible that,
deep down, my opponents wanted this - so that I too could be branded a traitor,
like Korchnoi, and then every effort would be made to help Karpov... When we
returned, my mother gave a detailed account of this memorable trip in an
article entitled 'The cloudless Spanish sky', published in the Baku chess
newspaper. --- A further week later, at the FIDE Congress in Manila, a
confessional letter from the Soviet Federation was read out, and Campomanes
stated with satisfaction that he was ready to organise the semi-final
Candidates matches anew. The text of the resolution adopted on Keene's
proposal read: 'The General Assembly unanimously extols the sportsmanship of
Grandmaster Korchnoi and Grandmaster Ribli in agreeing to play their
semi-final matches, and urges that all boycotts, especially that of Mr
Korchnoi, should be lifted forthwith.' This was the biggest concession of the
USSR Chess Federation in the entire history of its relations with FIDE. ---
Now the two Candidates matches, Korchnoi-Kasparov and Smyslov-Ribli, which
initially had been scattered to different corners of the world, were due to
come together on 20th November 1983 in the Great Eastern Hotel in London.} (1.
-- {I concluded my last pre-match training session at the start of November.
Although nearly all the press and the experts were predicting victory for me,
I realised that, despite the enormous age difference (32 years), Viktor
Korchnoi was a very dangerous opponent, with a mastery of numerous chess
techniques. It was assumed that he would avoid complications (perhaps, also
remembering our game at the Olympiad in Lucerne) and place the main emphasis
on the concluding stage of the game, where he would endeavour to do everything
to exploit his enormous experience and my impulsiveness. I knew that I must
not allow him to dictate the play in simple and technical positions, and so
earlier, at the summer training session before the 'match' in Pasadena,
together with my trainers I did a great amount of work not only on the opening,
but also the endgame, paying particular attention to a study of practical
endings. In the match this was repaid with interest! --- I was accompanied on
the flight to England by my mother, the leader of our delegation Azer Zeynally,
his deputy 'on security matters' Viktor Litvinov (from then on he would
accompany me on trips abroad right up to 1987), my doctor Khalid Gasanov and
my trainers - Nikitin, Timoshchenko and Vladimirov. Unfortunately, we were
able to arrive in London only on 18th November, and the two days, which were
also filled with organisational problems, were insufficient for normal
acclimatisation. --- The atmosphere at my match with the 'defector' proved
much calmer than had been expected. My relations with Korchnoi were normal.
Even so, I was not quite at ease, as I had not yet recovered from the stormy
pre-match tensions which for six months had kept me in suspense, and when I
sat down at the chess board it was difficult to appreciate the reality of what
was happening. The result of the 1st game was partly predetermined by the fact
that I was psychologically unprepared for an uncompromising battle.}) (1. -- {
Playing White, without hesitation I employed my favourite variation in the
Queen's Indian Defence - 1 d4 Nf6 2 c4 e6 3 Nf3 b6 4 Nc3 Bb7 5 a3 d5 6 cxd5
Nxd5 7 e3, but here I encountered a surprise - 7...g6! (instead of the usual 7...Be7 or 7...Nxc3 - Game Nos. 43, 52, 85). This move was already known (it had
been played by Short and Adorjan), but I had not studied it seriously. And I
gave insufficient attention to the five-minute game Tal-Korchnoi (Herzeg Novi
1983), which went 7...Nxc3 8 bxc3 g6. Something similar had also been tried
against me by Sosonko in the variation with 7 Qc2 (cf. Game No.73, note to
Black's 9th move). But my trainers and I had missed the idea of ...g7-g6. ---
Black's reply abruptly changed the pattern of the position: it led to a kind
of Grünfeld Defence, which was part of Korchnoi's armoury long before I was
born. Now it is hard for White to build up a combined attack in the centre and
on the kingside (which is precisely with what I had been very successful!),
and he has to seek other paths. My highly experienced opponent keenly sensed
that I would become nervous - especially in the first game of the match - and
that I would lose my aim. More than that: the effect of the surprise proved
stunning! I lost this game ignominiously, and it has remained for ever my only
defeat against Korchnoi (Game No.38 in Volume V of 'My Great Predecessors').})
(1. -- {Before the match Viktor Lvovich gave the following description of me:
'Kasparov is a player with a single knock-out blow. But if you can
successfully parry his fierce assault and be the first to land a blow,
Kasparov may lose confidence and begin to falter.' After the first game it
could have seemed that he was right. My play in it was depressing. I also
remembered a grim statistic - in all of the 12 Candidates matches that
Korchnoi had won (and altogether, incidentally, at that point he had played 15,
as well as two matches for the world championship), once he gained the lead he
never relinquished it. However, as Vladimirov philosophically remarked, 'there
is always a first time for everything...' --- In the 2nd game Korchnoi met my
Tarrasch Defence with quite a dangerous novelty, but I managed to neutralise
it (cf. Game No.91, note to Black's 12th move), and on the 31st move I
accepted my opponent's offer of a draw. The 3rd game was again a Queen's
Indian with a2-a3, where I chose the rare move 7 Qa4+, but the
originally-played opening did not bring White any dividends and a draw was
agreed as early as the 18th move. --- In the 4th game after 1 d4 d5 2 c4 e6 3
Nf3 I gave the Tarrasch a rest by playing 3...Nf6, and for the first time in
my career I defended the main variation of the Catalan Opening - 4 g3 Be7 5
Bg2 0-0 6 0-0 dxc4 7 Qc2 a6 etc. Of course, in this new position I had much to
fear, but after Korchnoi wrongly offered the exchange of queens on the 21st
move I conducted the ending confidently. The game was adjourned, but before
the resumption I accepted the opponent's draw offer. --- We were already one
third of the way through the match. Korchnoi was leading 2½-1½ and still
held the initiative. To change the character of the battle, radical measures
were required. I needed to properly compose myself, become fully accustomed to
the working rhythm and endeavour to think carefully about my subsequent steps.
In view of the seriousness of the position, we decided to use the only
allotted time-out.}) (1. -- {Alas, searches during the match for improvements
for White in the Queen's Indian with a2-a3 proved unsuccessful, and from the
5th game after 1 d4 Nf6 2 c4 e6 I had to switch to an 'emergency airport' - 3
g3 d5 4 Bg2 (cf. Game No.89, note to Black's 5th move). However, there was no
great fight, and on the 22nd move the players agreed a draw. Incidentally,
since the Catalan Opening was also employed by Korchnoi, it unexpectedly
became the main opening of the match, and decided its outcome (with Black I
gained two draws, and with White I scored 2½ out of 3). --- The score became
3-2 in Korchnoi's favour. At first sight, things were going badly for me. 'The
time-out did not help Kasparov', spitefully commented one of the English
newspapers. Naturally, another feeble failure to exploit the white pieces
influenced the opinions of chess commentators regarding the outcome of the
match. For the first time the Western press began predicting a win for
Korchnoi. Thus in the New York Times the English grandmaster Michael Stean
gave a detailed verbal description of the first five games, from which it
followed that, having managed to impose his play, Korchnoi's advantage would
be irreversible. --- However, it is a thankless task making forecasts in such
matches. After all, Korchnoi had not managed to build on his success, and a
lead of one point does not give any guarantees when there are still seven
games to go. Also, the opening of the 5th game had forced my opponent to
realise that in the 7th, 9th and 11th games things would not be easy for him -
of course, on condition that the standard of my play improved, but at some
point this was bound to happen! It was not surprising that Korchnoi was in a
hurry to land a second blow, aimed at breaking my resistance.}) (1. -- {The
morning of 4th December, the day of the 6th game, began for me with an
unexpected telephone call: 'Moscow on the line...' The subsequent conversation
with Botvinnik was the starting-point of the changes which occurred in the
match. Mikhail Moiseevich literally flabbergasted me with the question: 'Do
you remember what event occurred 50 years ago?' Half-awake, it was not easy to
get my bearings, but I extricated myself: 'In 1933 you played a match with
Flohr.' 'And how did the battle go?' a new question promptly followed. I had
to strain myself. 'I think that you lost the 1st and 6th games, but then
gained revenge in the 9th and 10th', I replied. 'Well, see now what a
favourable position you are in: you haven't yet lost the 6th game!', Botvinnik
unexpectedly concluded. After a slight pause he added: 'But in general,
everything is alright. A little more composure, and you should win the match.'
I was filled with positive emotions: at this difficult moment it was pleasant
to learn that my chess mentor had no doubts about a successful conclusion to
the match. --- But neither my most ardent fans, nor Korchnoi's most
pessimistic supporters, could have predicted the course of the subsequent
events: the degree of misfortune that struck my opponent in the second half of
the match was just too great. However, initially the 6th game developed
favourably for Korchnoi.}) *

[Event "88: Candidates Semi-Final, London"]
[Site "?"]
[Date "1983.12.04"]
[Round "6"]
[White "Korchnoi, V."]
[Black "Kasparov, G."]
[Result "0-1"]
[ECO "D30"]
[Annotator "Garry Kasparov"]
[PlyCount "156"]
[EventDate "1983.??.??"]
[Source "Everyman Chess"]
[SourceDate "2012.11.28"]

1. d4 d5 2. c4 e6 3. Nf3 c5 {During the time-out we neutralised the opponent's
novelty that he employed in the 2nd game, and I was ready to continue the duel
in the 'Tarrasch'.} 4. cxd5 exd5 5. g3 Nc6 ({Later, in order to avoid the
variation which occurred in the game, I played only} 5... Nf6 6. Bg2 Be7 7. O-O
O-O {, intending} 8. Be3 ({or} 8. Nc3 Nc6) 8... b6 $5 {and ...Bb7, transposing
into a solid Queen's Indian set-up, where Be3 is not considered dangerous for
Black.}) 6. Bg2 Nf6 7. O-O Be7 8. Be3 ({Avoiding the usual} 8. Nc3 O-O 9. dxc5
({or} 9. Bg5 {(Game Nos. 79, 91), Korchnoi surprises me with a rare move of
Taimanov's}) 9... Bxc5 10. Bg5 {(Game No.63).}) 8... c4 {I made this reply
without any particular thought, since I had studied the similar variation 8
Nc3 0-0 9 Be3 c4 10 Ne5 h6! (which later I successfully played against Larsen
and Hort) and I did not see that it made any great difference where White's
queen's knight was - at c3 or b1).} 9. Ne5 O-O 10. b3 $1 {The idea of delaying
the development of the knight on b1 becomes clear: the open c-file gives White
additional resources.} cxb3 11. Qxb3 {And here is a novelty!} ({Black has far
fewer problems after} 11. axb3 Nb4 {(Hartston-Bennett, London 1978). The
resulting unexplored position naturally put me on my guard.}) 11... Qb6 $6 {
The exchange of queens gives White a slightly better ending.} ({Two other
continuations, which occurred later, are more interesting:} 11... Na5 12. -- (
12. Qa4 a6 (12... Be6 $5) {, and here I was afraid of} 13. Bd2 $1 {, but after}
Nc4 $1 14. Nxc4 b5 {Black has an acceptable position (} 15. Qa5 bxc4 16. Qxd8
Rxd8 17. Ba5 Rd7 ({or} 17... Re8 $5 18. Nc3 Be6 {with equality}) 18. Nc3 Bd8 $1
) ({, or} 12. Qd3 $5 g6 13. Nc3 Bf5 14. Qd2 (14. Qb5 a6 $1) 14... Rc8 15. Bg5
Nc4 16. Nxc4 Rxc4 {with counterplay (Bischoff-Dittmar, Böblingen 1994).})) (
11... Bd6 $5 {(as yet the queen's knight has not come out to c3, attacking the
d5-pawn, and Black tries to drive the other knight from the centre)} 12. f4 ({
after} 12. Nxc6 $6 bxc6 {the effect of keeping the knight on b1 is lost}) 12...
Na5 (12... Bf5 $5) 13. Qd3 {(Klimov-Lasin, St. Petersburg 2003)} g6 $1 {, and
if} 14. f5 {, then simply} Nc6 {with approximate equality.}) 12. Rc1 $1 {
Exploiting the absence of the knight from c3.} ({However,} 12. Nc3 $5 {is also
not bad.}) ({After} 12. Qxb6 axb6 {Black's activity would compensate for the
spoiling of his pawn structure:} 13. Rc1 (13. Nc3 Be6 {and ...Rfc8}) 13... Nb4
14. Nc3 Bf5 {with equality. But now he is forced to exchange queens on b3,
which activates the rook on a1.}) 12... Qxb3 13. axb3 Nb4 14. Na3 $6 {An
original move, temporarily preventing the development of the c8-bishop 
(because of Rc7), but the awkward position of the knight at a3 prevents White
from exploiting the tempo gained.} ({The natural} 14. Nc3 {would have set
Black quite difficult problems, for example:} -- (14... Rd8 15. Nb5 (15. Na4
Bf5 $1) 15... a6 16. Nc7 $1 ({my earlier move} 16. Rc7 {is worse because of}
Bf8 $1) 16... Rb8 17. Bd2 Bf5 (17... Bd6 18. Ra4 $1) 18. Ra4 Nc2 19. e3 Bd6 20.
g4 $1 Nxg4 21. Nxd5 {with a continuing initiative}) (14... Be6 $2 15. Nb5 $1) (
14... Bf5 15. g4 $1 Be6 ({the defence is more difficult after} 15... Bxg4 $6
16. Nxg4 Nxg4 17. Nxd5 Nxd5 18. Bxd5 Nxe3 19. fxe3 Rfd8 20. Rc7 Rxd5 21. Rxe7)
16. g5 Ne8 17. Nb5 a6 18. Bd2 Rb8 19. Na7 $5 f6 (19... Ra8 20. Ra4 $1) 20. gxf6
gxf6 21. Ra4 {, and Black has not yet achieved full equality}) (14... a6 15.
Na4 $1 Bf5 16. Nb6 $1 (16. Rc7 Bd6 17. Rxb7 Nc2 18. Rd1 {is also not bad,} ({
but not my earlier suggestion} 18. Rc1 $6 {because of} Nxe3 $1 19. fxe3 Rae8 {
with equality})) 16... Rad8 17. Ra4 Nd7 (17... Nc2 18. Bg5) 18. Nexd7 Bxd7 19.
Nxd7 Rxd7 20. Bd2 Nc6 21. e3 {with the two bishops and some advantage.})) 14...
a6 $1 {Emphasising that at a3 the knight stands worse than at c3. Now Black
has a quite reasonable position.} 15. Bd2 (15. Nb5 Bf5 $1 {with equality}) ({
while if} 15. Nc2 {the simplest is} Nxc2 16. Rxc2 Bd6 $5 17. Nd3 Be6 18. Nc5
Rfc8 {.}) 15... Rb8 {With the intention of seizing the initiative by ...Bf5.
Therefore White has to do something.} 16. Bxb4 $5 {The start of a clever
strategic plan, which I did not see through immediately. White exchanges his
ineffective bishop for the important knight, which is fulfilling both
defensive and attacking functions.} Bxb4 17. Nd3 {At c5 the knight will
immobilise Black's queenside.} Bd6 {After obtaining the advantage of the two
bishops, I did not want to part with them and I was happy with my position,
but I failed to take into account the static weakness of the d5-pawn.} ({The
alternative was} 17... Bd2 $5 18. Rc2 Bh6 {.}) ({But if I had discarded my
prejudices and played} 17... Bxa3 {, I could have equalised easily:} 18. Rxa3
Bf5 $1 ({my 'Informator' move} 18... Bg4 {is worse because of} 19. f3 $5 Bf5
20. Nc5 Rfe8 21. Kf2) 19. b4 (19. Nc5 a5 $1 {and ...b7-b6}) 19... Rbc8 20. Rac3
Rxc3 21. Rxc3 Rc8 $1 22. Rxc8+ (22. Nc5 b6) 22... Bxc8 23. Nf4 Be6 {with a
quick draw.}) 18. Nc2 {Unexpectedly for me, Korchnoi transfers his knight to
e3, to intensify the pressure on the d5-pawn, and then advances b3-b4 and
supports his other knight at c5, or plays b4-b5. In this case, alas, Black has
no real counterplay.} Bg4 {A futile waste of time: the place for this bishop
is at e6.} ({After} 18... Be6 $1 19. Ne3 Rfc8 {compared with the continuation
in the game Black would have had two extra tempi and he would have held the
position without any problems, for example:} 20. b4 Rxc1+ 21. Rxc1 g6 22. Rb1
Rd8 23. Nc5 Bc8 {.}) 19. Kf1 Bf5 $6 {Another strange, 'futile' move.} ({The
obvious} 19... Rfc8 20. Ne3 Be6 {would have saved a tempo. After playing 19...
Bf5 I offered a draw, but this was quite reasonably refused - the initiative
is now with White.}) 20. Nc5 Rfc8 ({The panicky double exchange} 20... Bxc5 $6
21. dxc5 Bxc2 22. Rxc2 {would have condemned Black to a cheerless defence.})
21. Ne3 Be6 22. b4 Kf8 23. Rc2 Ke7 ({The weak} 23... b6 $2 {would have allowed}
24. Nxe6+ fxe6 25. Rxa6 {, winning a pawn:} Bxb4 26. Bh3 $1 Ke7 27. Rxc8 Rxc8
28. Rxb6 Bd6 29. Bf5 $5 {and Bd3.}) 24. Ke1 h5 {A useful move with the hope of
either initiating play on the kingside by ...h5-h4, or of possibly playing ...Ng4.} ({In 'The Test of Time' I criticised} 24... b6 {(!?) in view of} 25. Nxa6
Rxc2 26. Nxc2 Ra8 {(?!)} ({but} 26... Rc8 $1 {is more accurate:} 27. Ne3 (27.
Kd2 Ng4) 27... Ra8 28. Ra2 (28. b5 Bb4+ $1) 28... Rc8 {with compensation for
the pawn (thanks to the poor position of the knight on a6). So that Black had
an interesting opportunity to change the character of the play}) 27. b5 Ne4 28.
Rb1 {.}) 25. Rb2 Rc7 ({Not hurrying with} 25... h4 {(for the moment this would
have made little change). From c7 the rook defends the b7-pawn and keeps the
knight at c5 under attack (in the event of b4-b5), while the other rook can be
switched along the back rank to where the battle is the most intense.}) 26. Nd3
{After completing all his preparations, White has created the threat of b4-b5.
At this point I felt depressed, sensing that I had succumbed to the opponent's
pressure.} Ra8 $1 {Now b4-b5 loses its strength because of ...a6-a5. In my
view, this was a turning point not only in the game, but also in the match: up
until then all the events had been dictated by Korchnoi.} 27. b5 $6 {Although
he appreciated the riskiness of this step, Korchnoi could not deny himself the
pleasure of winning a pawn.} (27. Rba2 {with the idea of Ra5 was stronger, for
example:} -- (27... Rd8 28. Ra5 ({or} 28. b5 $5 axb5 29. Ra5 Bd7 (29... b4 30.
Bxd5) 30. Nxd5+ Nxd5 {with some pressure}) 28... Rc3 $5 {(threatening ...Rxd3
and ...Bxb4)} 29. Rb1 ({of course, not} 29. Nxd5+ $2 Bxd5 30. Bxd5 Rxd3 {and
wins}) 29... Bc7 30. Rc5 Ne4 31. Bxe4 Rxc5 32. Nxc5 dxe4 33. Rd1 Bd6 $1 34. d5
Bc8 35. Nc4 f5 {, and White's achievements are modest.}) (27... Rc6 $5 {(with
the idea of ...Rb6)} 28. b5 Rb6 29. Ra5 g6 {, and Black's defences hold. ---
But my opponent, burning with a desire to achieve immediate gains, was
over-hasty...})) 27... a5 {With the threat of ...b7-b6. The situation has
changed sharply: it is clear that White has taken on increased obligations.}
28. b6 Rc6 29. Rb5 (29. Ra4 {is harmless:} Ra6 (29... Rc3 $5) 30. Rb5 Rcxb6 31.
Rxb6 Rxb6 32. Rxa5 Ne4 ({or} 32... Bc7 {.})) 29... a4 {There is nothing else.}
30. Nxd5+ $6 (30. Nc5 $6 Bxc5 31. dxc5 Rcc8 $1 {is also in Black's favour.}) ({
But it was not yet too late to reconsider - the simplification after} 30. Nb4
$1 Bxb4+ 31. Rxb4 a3 32. Rb3 a2 33. Rb2 Kd6 34. Rbxa2 Rxa2 35. Rxa2 Rxb6 {
would have led to a draw.}) 30... Nxd5 31. Bxd5 Bxd5 32. Rxd5 Rxb6 33. Rxh5 {
And so, White has won the longed-for pawn, but in return he has granted the
opponent two connected passed pawns on the queenside and excellent counterplay.
In the end, Korchnoi's downfall was caused by his eternal penchant for
material!} ({However, he can have had no great desire to suffer for free after
} 33. e4 Rb3 ({or} 33... a3 34. Ra2) ({or} 33... g6 34. Kd2 {with chances of
blocking the powerful black pawns}) 34. Kd2 ({not my earlier variation} 34. e5
$6 Ba3 $1) 34... Bb4+ $5 (34... b5 35. Rc1 $1) (34... g6 35. f4 $1) 35. Nxb4
Rxb4 36. Kc3 {. --- The subsequent moves, up to the 40th, were made in a time
scramble (which was more acute for Korchnoi).}) 33... Rb3 $6 {With the
tempting idea of advancing the b-pawn.} ({However, both} 33... Bb4+ $5 34. Kd1
Bc3) (33... g6 $5 34. Rd5 ({or} 34. Rg5 Bb4+) 34... a3 {came into
consideration.}) 34. Kd2 ({The less obvious} 34. Kd1 $5 {would have enabled
White to parry} b5 ({nothing is changed by the inclusion of} 34... g6 35. Rg5)
35. Nc1 {, with the perpetual pursuit of the rook.}) 34... b5 ({Now after} 
34... g6 35. Rg5 {the king would have been brought up to the defence - 36 Kc2
with equality.}) 35. h4 $6 (35. e4 $2 {did not work in view of} Rc8 36. e5 Bb4+
37. Nxb4 Rxb4 {, when the black pawns are irresistible.}) ({But accurate
equality could still have been secured by the psychologically difficult move} 
35. Rc1 $1 {, for example:} b4 (35... g6 36. Rg5) 36. Rb5 $1 a3 37. Kc2 $1 Rc3+
38. Kb1 {.}) 35... Rc8 ({Although this suggests itself,} 35... Bb4+ $5 {came
into consideration.}) 36. g4 $2 {Another 'natural' time-trouble move.} ({In
fact it was essential to play} 36. Rg5 $1 g6 37. g4 (37. h5 {(?!), given in
'The Test of Time', is worse because of} gxh5 38. Rxh5 Rc4) 37... a3 (37... Kf6
38. Nc5) (37... Rcc3 38. Ke3 Kf6 39. f4 {with double-edged play}) 38. h5 $1 {.}
) 36... a3 $1 37. f4 {Black now has a winning position;} ({thus,} 37. Rg5 {did
not save White in view of} b4 $1 38. Rb5 Rc4 $1 39. e3 Kd7 {, and if} 40. h5 {
, then} Rcc3 $1 41. Nxb4 Rc4 $1 {.}) 37... Rcc3 $6 {With the erroneous idea of
sacrificing the exchange on d3, which in time-trouble seemed very promising to
me. However, it is unwise to undertake such committing and unforced operations
just before the time control.} ({For the moment Black needs both his rooks,
and therefore} 37... Rc4 $1 {was more accurate} 38. -- ({, after} 38. Ke3 Rc2
$1 39. Rh8 b4 40. Ra8 Rbc3 {and ...b4-b3}) ({, or} 38. e3 b4 39. Rb5 Kd7 $1 40.
Rc5 $5 Bxc5 41. Ne5+ Ke6 42. Nxc4 Rc3 $1 43. dxc5 Rxc4 {the a- and b-pawns
would have decided matters}) ({, while after} 38. Rd5 {(other rook moves are
met by ...b5-b4)} Ke6 39. e4 Rcc3 40. Nc5+ Bxc5 41. Rxc5 Rh3 $1 {White comes
under attack.} (41... --))) 38. Rd5 (38. Rh8 b4 39. Ra8 Rc4 $1 {would hardly
have been any more resilient.}) 38... Ke6 39. Rh5 b4 $2 {But this is a serious
error, allowing the rook at h5 to come into play.} ({It was not yet too late
to bring the rook back -} 39... Rc4 $1 {, retaining every chance of winning.})
({Previously I thought that after the immediate} 39... Rxd3+ {(?!)} 40. exd3
Bxf4+ 41. Ke2 Rb2+ $1 (41... Bd6 42. Ke3 $1) 42. Kf3 Bd6 {'Black could have
set his opponent insoluble problems', but here too White is saved by the
switching of his rook from h5 to the a-file:} 43. d5+ $1 Kd7 44. Rh8 b4 45. Ra8
Rc2 ({or} 45... Be5 46. d4 $1 Bxd4 47. Ke4 Bc3 48. Rd1 {with equality}) 46. Ke4
Rg2 (46... Kc7 47. Ra6 $1) 47. Ra7+ Kd8 48. Rc1 $1 {(with the ideas of Rc6 and
Ra8+).}) 40. Ra5 Rxd3+ ({Now this is the only winning chance, not counting the
other exchange sacrifice -} 40... Rb2+ 41. Nxb2 Bxf4+ (41... axb2 $6 42. f5+ $1
) 42. e3 Bxe3+ 43. Ke2 axb2 44. Rb1 {with a probable draw:} Bxd4 ({or} 44...
Bc1 45. Rb5 b3 46. d5+ (46. h5 f6 $1) 46... Ke5 47. Rb7 Kxd5 48. Rxf7 Re3+ 49.
Kd1 {etc.}) 45. Rxb2 Re3+ 46. Kd2 Rg3 47. Rb1 {.}) 41. exd3 {Here the game was
adjourned, and I sealed the obvious move.} Bxf4+ {After a detailed analysis it
became clear that the position was one of dynamic balance: as a counter to the
passed pawns, White creates play against the enemy king. Of course, I was
upset about the missed win. But Korchnoi, apparently also thinking that a draw
was not far off, did not analyse the position thoroughly enough, and on the
resumption interesting events occurred.} 42. Ke2 Rc3 $1 {With the idea of ...Bc1, shutting in the rook on a1 and preparing ...b4-b3.} (42... Rb2+ 43. Kf3
Bd2 {is too slow in view of} 44. Ke4 Bc3 45. Ra6+ Ke7 46. Rf1 $1 {followed by
Kd5 and Ra7+}) ({while the 'subtle'} 42... Bc7 $6 {allows a counterattack -}
43. Ra6+ Bd6 ({or} 43... Kd7 44. Rf1 $1) ({or} 43... Kd5 $6) 44. Rc1 $1 {.})
43. g5 $6 {In our analysis we did not seriously consider this move.} ({A
straightforward draw would have been ensured by} 43. Kf3 Bc1 ({it is no better
to play} 43... Bd6 {(d2)} 44. Ke4) (43... Bc7 44. Ra4) ({or} 43... Rc1 44.
R1xa3 $1) 44. Ke4 Kd6 45. Ra6+ Kc7 (45... Kd7 46. Ra7+ {etc.}) 46. d5 {. But
when resuming a game Korchnoi always like to try and startle his opponent with
an unexpected move...}) 43... Bc1 $1 44. h5 b3 {Forcing White to return the
exchange.} 45. R5xa3 Bxa3 46. Rxa3 b2 47. Ra6+ Kf5 48. Rb6 ({(it was not
possible to save the pawns -} 48. Ra5+ $2 Kf4 $1 49. Rb5 Rc2+ {)}) 48... Rc2+
49. Ke3 Kxg5 {In this sharp ending, which demands precise calculation by both
sides, White is running considerably greater risks.} 50. d5 $1 {The most
energetic.} ({White is saved by a miracle after} 50. Rb5+ f5 ({or} 50... Kf6 $5
51. Rb6+ $1 Ke7 52. d5) 51. d5 Kxh5 52. d6 Rc5 53. Rxb2 Rd5 54. Rb6 g5 55. d4
Kg4 56. Rc6 (56. Kd3 $2 Kf3) 56... Kg3 57. Rc5 $1 Rxd6 58. Rxf5 {with a draw.})
50... Kxh5 51. Kd4 (51. d6 $6 {is too risky:} Rc6 $1 52. Rxb2 Rxd6 53. Rf2 f6
54. d4 g5 {.}) 51... g5 (51... Kg4 52. Rb7 $1 {.}) 52. Rb8 {In order to
activate his passed pawn.} (52. Ke5 g4 ({or} 52... Re2+ 53. Kf5 Rf2+ 54. Ke5
f6+ 55. Ke6 Kg6 56. d6 Re2+ 57. Kd5 Kf7 58. Rb8 {etc. would also have led to a
draw}) 53. d6 Rc5+ $1 54. Kf4 $1 {.}) 52... g4 53. d6 {Here I stopped to think.
..} Rc6 $5 {The last chance of achieving a turning-point.} ({I saw that after} 
53... Rc8 54. Rxb2 (54. Rxc8 $2 b1=Q 55. d7 Qb6+ 56. Kc3 Qa5+ 57. Kc4 Qa4+ {
and ...Qxd7}) 54... g3 55. Ke3 $1 {White would succeed in eliminating the
danger -} Kg4 56. Rb4+ Kh3 57. Rb5 ({or immediately} 57. Kf3 {with an
inevitable draw.})) 54. Ke5 $1 ({Black's idea consisted in} 54. Kd5 Rc8 $1 55.
-- (55. Rxb2 $2 g3 56. d7 (56. Ke4 Kg4) 56... Rd8 57. Kd6 f5 58. Ke7 Rxd7+ 59.
Kxd7 f4 {, when the pawns cannot be stopped.}) ({. But after} 55. Rxc8 $3 b1=Q
56. d7 {White is nevertheless saved by the threat of d7-d8Q -} Qb5+ $1 (56...
Qxd3+ 57. Kc6 Qc4+ 58. Kd6 {with a draw}) 57. Kd6 Qb6+ 58. Ke7 Qe6+ 59. Kd8 g3
({if} 59... Qe5 {there is the saving} 60. d4 $1 Qxd4 61. Ke7 {with a draw}) 60.
Kc7 {, for example:} -- (60... Qe7 61. Re8 $1 Qc5+ 62. Kb7 Qd5+ 63. Kc7 f5 64.
d8=Q Qxd8+ 65. Rxd8 f4 66. Rg8 {with a draw.}) (60... g2 61. Rh8+ {and d8Q.}) (
60... Qe5+ 61. Kc6 g2 (61... Qc3+ 62. Kb7 Qb4+ 63. Kc7 {with a draw}) 62. d8=Q
Qe6+ (62... g1=Q $2 63. Qh8+ $1) 63. Kb7 g1=Q 64. Qh8+ Qh6 65. Qe5+ Qgg5 66.
Qe2+ $1 ({not} 66. Qh2+ $2 Kg6 67. Rg8+ ({or} 67. Rc6+ f6) 67... Kh7) 66... Kh4
(66... Qg4 67. Rc5+) 67. Qh2+ Kg4 68. Qg2+ (68. Rc4+ $2 Kf3) 68... Kh5 69. Qe2+
{with perpetual check in this position with a rare material balance.}))) 54...
Rc5+ 55. Kf6 $6 {Playing with fire! Korchnoi's idea is hard to understand:
surely he wasn't looking for winning chances?!} (55. Kd4 Rc8 56. Rxb2 {was
simpler with a clear draw, as in the variation from the note to Black's 53rd
move.}) 55... g3 $1 56. Rxb2 Rd5 57. Kxf7 Rxd6 58. Rd2 Kg4 {After speedily
passing the second time control, White again faces a difficult choice.} 59. d4
$1 {The only move;} ({White would have lost after} 59. Ke7 $2 Rd4 $1 60. Ke6
Kf4 $1 {. But now he can give up his rook for the g-pawn, since for the d-pawn
Black will have to pay the same price.}) 59... Kf5 $5 {This cunning route for
the king sets White new problems;} ({whereas} 59... Kf4 {would have allowed
him a simple draw:} 60. Ke7 Rg6 (60... Rd5 61. Ke6) 61. Rg2 $1 Ke4 62. Kf7 Rg4
63. Ke6 Kxd4 {(f6)} 64. Kf5 {. The amount of work carried out by the black
king during the resumption is impressive!}) 60. Ke7 Rd5 61. Rd3 $1 {The only
way.} (61. Rg2 $2 Kf4 62. Rd2 Ke4 63. Rg2 Kf3 64. Rd2 g2 {and wins.}) 61... Kf4
62. Ke6 Rg5 63. d5 $2 ({A fatal mistake when literally a step away from a draw
-} 63. Rd1 $1 -- (63... g2 64. Rg1 Ke4 65. d5 Rg6+ 66. Kf7) (63... Rg6+ 64. Kf7
Rd6 65. Ke7) ({, or} 63... Ke4 64. d5 $1 Rg6+ (64... Re5+ 65. Kd6 g2 66. Re1+
Kd4 67. Rd1+) 65. Ke7 $1 Ke5 66. d6 Rg7+ 67. Kf8 Rd7 68. Rd3 Kf4 69. Rd4+ {,
when a peaceful outcome is inevitable (} Ke3 ({or} 69... Kf3 70. Rd3+ Kg4 71.
Ke8 g2 72. Rd1) 70. Rg4 Kf3 71. Rg6 g2 72. Rf6+ Ke2 73. Rg6 {). --- Korchnoi
splendidly conducted a difficult defence, but at the very end he no longer had
the strength to find the last accurate move.})) 63... Rg6+ $1 ({Denying the
opponent the illusory hope of interposing a check -} 63... g2 $2 64. Rd4+ $1
Ke3 65. Rd1 {with a draw.}) 64. Ke7 ({Or} 64. Kf7 g2 65. Rd1 Rd6 66. Ke7 Rxd5
67. Rxd5 g1=Q {and wins.}) 64... g2 65. Rd1 Ke5 $1 {As they say in such cases,
the rest is a matter of technique.} 66. d6 Re6+ 67. Kd7 Rxd6+ 68. Rxd6 g1=Q 69.
Re6+ Kf5 70. Rd6 Qa7+ 71. Kd8 Ke5 72. Rg6 Qa5+ 73. Kd7 Qa4+ 74. Ke7 Qh4+ $1 75.
Kf8 Qd8+ 76. Kf7 Kf5 77. Rh6 Qd7+ 78. Kf8 Kg5 0-1

[Event "89: Candidates Semi-Final, London"]
[Site "?"]
[Date "1983.12.06"]
[Round "7"]
[White "Kasparov, G."]
[Black "Korchnoi, V."]
[Result "1-0"]
[ECO "E04"]
[Annotator "Garry Kasparov"]
[PlyCount "91"]
[EventDate "1983.??.??"]
[Source "Everyman Chess"]
[SourceDate "2012.11.28"]

{And so, to the surprise of both players, the match score became equal: 3-3.
The psychological initiative was now on my side. Korchnoi's oversight in such
a significant game (and after so much effort!) broke his will and undermined
his confidence and composure. Such a defeat was too cruel a trial, even for a
highly-experienced fighter. Besides, Korchnoi was bound to sense that I was
gradually gaining in confidence and that the time was not far off when I would
be operating at full strength. --- However, it should not be forgotten that in
the semi-final match of the previous cycle with Polugayevsky (1980), after a
crushing defeat in the 12th, concluding game, Korchnoi nevertheless managed to
snatch victory in the additional games. Indeed, when a player is behind, he
aims in the first instance to level the scores, and on achieving his aim he
often relaxes involuntarily, although the entire struggle still lies ahead.
Therefore only the 7th game could decide how real were the changes that had
occurred during the course of this bitter struggle. --- I think that Korchnoi
made a mistake by not taking a time-out after his defeat in the 6th game. The
7th game was scheduled to be played the following day, less than 24 hours
later. Memories of the disaster during the adjournment session were still too
fresh, and my opponent looked depressed.} 1. d4 Nf6 2. c4 e6 3. g3 d5 4. Bg2 {
The favourite opening of Korchnoi himself, whereas before the match I had
employed it only once - against Andersson (Niksic 1983), and that when I knew
almost for sure which system of defence my opponent would choose.} dxc4 5. Nf3
Bd7 $5 {Korchnoi did not arrive for the game empty-handed. The effusive Miguel
Najdorf tried to convince everyone in the press centre that he had played this
50 years earlier. But in the early 1980s this move had not found its way into
the 'Encyclopaedia of Chess Openings' and for me it was a novelty, which I had
to figure out at the board.} ({It would have been naïve to hope that my
opponent would repeat the dubious experiment from the 5th game, where after} 
5... c5 6. O-O Nbd7 $6 ({avoiding the main lines with} 6... Nc6 7. Qa4 ({or} 7.
Ne5 Bd7 8. Na3 cxd4 9. Naxc4 {, Kasparov-Andersson, 1st and 3rd match games,
Belgrade 1985}) 7... cxd4 8. Nxd4 Qxd4 9. Rd1 {, as in the aforementioned game
with Andersson}) 7. Na3 Nb6 8. Nxc4 Nxc4 9. Qa4+ Bd7 10. Qxc4 {White gained a
small but enduring advantage.}) ({In the 9th game Korchnoi chose another
little-studied continuation -} 5... Nbd7 6. O-O Rb8 $6 {. But this plan was
familiar to me from a training game with Vladimirov (1982), and after} 7. a4 b6
8. Nfd2 $1 e5 $5 9. Nxc4 $1 exd4 10. Qxd4 Bc5 11. Qd3 O-O 12. Nc3 Bb7 13. Bxb7
Rxb7 14. Qf3 Qa8 15. Bf4 {White gained the initiative.}) 6. Qc2 {On
encountering a surprise, I decided for safety's sake to regain the gambit pawn
immediately. Apparently, in my sub-conscious the thought occurred to me: 'The
scores are level - is it worth taking an unnecessary risk?!'} ({Significantly
more complicated play results from} 6. Nbd2 Bb4 {(Sosonko-Korchnoi, Wijk aan
Zee 1984; Zurich 1984)}) ({or the most critical line} 6. Ne5 Bc6 7. Nxc6 Nxc6
8. O-O (8. Qa4 Qd7 $1 {, Hulak-Korchnoi, Sarajevo 1984}) 8... Qd7 9. e3 $5 (9.
Nc3 Nxd4 10. Bxb7 Rb8 11. Bg2 Be7 {with equality, Yusupov-Karpov, Belfort 1988}
) 9... Rb8 10. Qe2 b5 11. b3 $1 cxb3 12. axb3 {with good compensation for the
pawn (Beliavsky-Karpov, 55th USSR Championship, Moscow 1988). It was because
of this that the move 5...Bd7 did not become widely established.}) 6... c5 $1
7. O-O {Again a solid, but rather insipid move.} (7. Ne5 {is harmless in view
of} Nc6 $1 {(Vaganian-Portisch, 3rd match game, Saint John 1988)}) ({but
chances of gaining an advantage were offered by} 7. Qxc4 $5 {- this position
was reached by transposition in the 8th game, and after} Bc6 8. dxc5 Nbd7 9.
Be3 Bd5 $1 10. Qa4 Bc6 11. Qc4 Bd5 12. Qb4 Qc8 (12... a5 $1 {with equality})
13. Nc3 Bxc5 14. Bxc5 Qxc5 15. Nxd5 Nxd5 16. Qd2 Rc8 17. O-O O-O 18. Rac1 Qb6
19. Qd4 Rfd8 20. Rfd1 Qxd4 21. Nxd4 {White had a slight edge.}) 7... Bc6 8.
Qxc4 Nbd7 {The opening has turned out favourably for Black - he has achieved
the maximum he can hope for in the Catalan: his minor pieces are controlling
the centre, and the advanced position of the white queen gives him tempi for
development. It is already White who has to play accurately.} 9. Bg5 (9. Nc3 {
is satisfactorily answered by the energetic} b5 ({or the developing} 9... Rc8 {
(Bacrot-Korchnoi, Odessa (rapid) 2007)}) 10. Qd3 b4 11. Nb1 Be4 {
(Kochiev-Lputian, Pavlodar 1982).}) 9... Rc8 (9... cxd4 10. Nxd4 Bxg2 11. Kxg2
Be7 {was simpler, with equality (Lerner-Dorfman, Tallinn 1983), since now
White creates a certain lack of harmony in the opponent's position.}) 10. Bxf6
$5 {A somewhat unexpected but quite justified exchange of bishop for knight.} (
10. Nc3 cxd4 {is harmless. All the same the bishop has no future, and in
addition each of the three possible recaptures has its drawbacks. Korchnoi
hesitated for about half an hour, but in the end safety considerations
outweighed, and he went in for simplification.} (10... b5 $5 {.})) 10... Nxf6
$6 {The most natural continuation - and the least good!} ({After} 10... gxf6 $5
{Black's two bishops compensate for the defects of his pawn structure 
(Inkiov-Pinter, Zagreb Interzonal 1987).}) ({But from the standpoint of
seizing the initiative, the best was} 10... Qxf6 $1 11. Nc3 Be7 {- this
recommendation of mine was analysed in 'Informator' Volume 36.}) 11. dxc5 Bxf3
{It is a pity to part with this strong bishop, of course, but without
detriment to the position the pawn cannot be regained.} (11... Qd5 12. Qxd5
Nxd5 (12... Bxd5 13. b4) 13. Nd4 ({there is also no rapid equality after} 13.
Rc1 Bd7 14. Nc3 Nxc3 15. Rxc3 Rxc5 16. Rxc5 Bxc5 17. Ne5) 13... Bxc5 14. Nxc6
bxc6 (14... Rxc6 $6 15. Nc3) 15. Nd2) ({or} 11... Bxc5 12. Qxc5 Bxf3 13. Qb5+
Bc6 14. Bxc6+ bxc6 15. Qa4 {, and thanks to the weakness of the c6-pawn
White's chances are slightly better.}) 12. Bxf3 Bxc5 {It only remains for
Black to castle, in order to feel completely safe. At this moment I noticed
that Korchnoi, expecting that peace negotiations would soon begin, relaxed
somewhat. But it turns out that even such a seemingly lifeless position
conceals a number of subtleties.} 13. Qb5+ ({Little is promised by} 13. e3 Qd7
14. Qb3 O-O 15. Nc3 Rc7 {.}) 13... Qd7 14. Nc3 $1 {White completes his
development with gain of tempo, whereas Black is still faced with the problem
of defending his queenside.} Qxb5 ({Black himself is forced to activate the
enemy knight: after} 14... O-O $6 15. Qxb7 $1 Qxb7 16. Bxb7 Rb8 17. Ba6 $1 Bd4
(17... Rxb2 $2 18. Na4 Rc2 19. Bd3 $1) 18. Rfd1 Bxc3 19. bxc3 Ne4 20. Rd7 Nxc3
21. Rc7 Nd5 22. Rxa7 {White has an obvious advantage.}) 15. Nxb5 Ke7 {After
the exchange of queens the black king has taken up a comfortable position in
the centre of the board, and it would seem that no dangers should be
anticipated.} 16. b4 $1 {An original decision, called by Petrosian 'an oasis,
unexpectedly found in a barren desert'. In itself this move is not so strong,
but its psychological effect was enormous: Korchnoi became nervous - instead
of the expected draw offer the opponent set him a new problem!} ({Black is
satisfied with} 16. Bxb7 $6 Rb8 17. Ba6 (17. Rac1 $2 Rxb7 18. Rxc5 Nd7 19. Rg5
h6 {and wins}) 17... Rb6 18. Rac1 Nd7 19. Nc7 Rxb2) ({or} 16. Rac1 Bb6 $5 (
16... Nd5 {will also do}) 17. Bxb7 Rxc1 18. Rxc1 Ng4 19. e3 Nxe3 $1 {. But the
tempo available to White can be used more effectively.}) 16... Bxb4 (16... Bb6
$2 {is dangerous, not because of} 17. Bxb7 ({but in view of} 17. a4 $1 a6 18.
a5 Bc7 19. Bxb7 $1 axb5 20. Rac1 {, and for the passed a-pawn Black has to
give up a piece}) 17... Rc4 18. a3 Ng4 $1 19. e3 Rb8 20. Bf3 Ne5 21. Be2 Rc2
22. Bd1 Rd2 {with active play for the pawn.}) 17. Nxa7 Rc7 $2 {A blunder,
which can only be explained by extreme nervous tension.} (17... Ra8 $1 {would
have maintained the balance, for example:} 18. Nb5 ({or} 18. Rfb1 Rxa7 19. Rxb4
Rb8 20. a4 {, and in 'The Test of Time' I wrote that 'Black faces a gruelling
defence', but in fact the a4-pawn is also weak and after} b6 {followed by ...Nd7 White has no real chances of success}) 18... Ra5 19. a4 Rc8 $1 ({more
active than my 'Informator' suggestion} 19... Rb8) 20. Bxb7 Rc4 $1 {the
a4-pawn is lost.}) 18. Rfc1 $1 {It would appear that Korchnoi underestimated
this move, thinking that Black had the reply 18...Rhc8. It is not often that
one sees scattered pieces coordinating so successfully: it suddenly turns out
to be impossible to defend the b7-pawn!} Rd7 $2 {But this is already confusion.
} ({All the same the b7-pawn cannot be saved, but one pair of rooks should
have been exchanged -} 18... Rxc1+ 19. Rxc1 {, although after} Nd5 ({or} 19...
Ra8 20. Rc7+ Kf8 21. Rxb7 Bc5 22. Nc6 Bd6 ({after} 22... Rxa2 $2 23. Ne5 $1 {
the f7-point comes under pressure:} Ra7 $2 {is not possible because of} 24.
Rb8+ $1) 23. Ra7 Rxa7 24. Nxa7 {Black's further plan, in the words of Nikitin,
'would have resembled slow torture before the carrying out of the death
sentence'. And yet here there would still have been chances of a draw, whereas
now they quickly evaporate}) 20. Bxd5 exd5 21. Rc7+ Kf6 22. Rxb7 {.}) 19. Rab1
{The extra pawn, activity of his rooks and the unexpected vulnerability of the
black king on e7 make White's advantage decisive.} Bd2 20. Rc2 Rhd8 21. Bxb7 $1
{The right way: there is point in going in for simplification. In just five
moves the position has changed beyond recognition - Black's queenside has been
devastated, and his pieces are unable to coordinate their actions. The outcome
of the game is decided, but on his way to winning White still had to overcome
the fierce resistance of an opponent who had absolutely no desire to lose a
second game in a row.} Kf8 {This retreat from the centre is forced.} 22. Nc6
Rc7 {There is no longer any choice;} ({if} 22... Re8 {White wins easily by} 23.
Ne5 Rdd8 24. Rc7 ({to say nothing of} 24. Nc4 Bh6 25. a4 {or the immediate 23
a4!.})) 23. Rbb2 $1 {Inspired by such a turn of events, I made the most
accurate moves, as they now say 'following the first line of the computer'.}
Rd6 {Again the most resilient move.} ({If} 23... Rd5 {, then} 24. e4 $1 Nxe4
25. Na7 {(d4) and wins.}) ({After} 23... Rdd7 24. Ne5 $1 {Black also suffers
further loss of material:} Re7 25. Bc6 $1 Ba5 26. Rb5 {etc.}) 24. a4 $1 {The
time has come for the swift advance of the passed pawn.} ({The main thing is
not to be in a hurry to disentangle the amusing cluster of pieces: thus} 24.
Rxd2 $6 Rxd2 25. Rxd2 Rxb7 {would have given Black some saving chances.}) 24...
Be1 {A desperate attempt to divert White's attention from the queenside, if
only for an instant.} 25. Rb1 {The threat of ...Ng4 could have been ignored;} (
{after} 25. a5 Ng4 26. a6 $1 Bxf2+ 27. Kg2 {White would also have won (} Ba7
28. Nxa7 Ne3+ 29. Kf2 Nxc2 30. Nb5 {etc.). But I firmly decided not to allow
Black the slightest counter-chances.}) 25... Nd5 {Still hoping to go fishing
in troubled waters.} 26. Ba8 {White does not rush, and just in case he gains
time by repeating moves.} Rc8 27. Bb7 Rc7 28. Rc4 $1 {This accurate manoeuvre
effectively puts an end to all Black's hopes. Now it is the turn of the a-pawn.
} Ne7 {An attempt to exchange the knights, when it might be possible to save
the ending with opposite-colour bishops.} 29. Ne5 $1 {Again the best move;} ({
although the following elegant line was also sufficient:} 29. a5 Nxc6 30. a6
Ba5 31. Rxc6 Rdxc6 32. Bxc6 (32. a7 $2 Ra6 33. Bxa6 Rxa7 {with a draw}) 32...
Ra7 33. Bb7 {and wins.}) 29... Ba5 30. Rb5 ({A simple combination -} 30. Rxc7
Bxc7 31. a5 $1 Bxa5 32. Nc4 Bc7 33. Nxd6 Bxd6 34. Rd1 {- would have led to a
technically won endgame. But White, not concerning himself with material gains,
paves the way for his a-pawn with an 'iron hand'.}) 30... Ng6 {Again trying
for the exchange!} 31. Nc6 {The knight is back where it started, but now Black
does not have even a hint of counterplay.} (31. Rxa5 Rxb7 32. Nc6 {was also
strong.}) 31... Rd1+ 32. Kg2 Be1 33. a5 ({The unexpected} 33. Ba6 $1 {would
have won more spectacularly after} Kg8 34. Rb8+ Nf8 35. Bb5 g6 (35... Ra1 $2
36. Ne7+ $1 Rxe7 37. Rxf8+ $1 {, mating}) 36. a5 {etc.}) 33... Ne7 34. a6 Nxc6
({If} 34... Ra1 {, then} 35. Na5 {and 36 a7!. The knight, which has caused
Black so much trouble, has nevertheless been exchanged, but the a-pawn is
already too far advanced...}) 35. Rxc6 Rxc6 36. Bxc6 Ra1 {Opposite-colour
bishops often favour the weaker side, but here the black bishop presents a
pitiful spectacle.} 37. Rb8+ Ke7 38. Rb7+ Kd6 ({In the event of} 38... Kf6 39.
a7 {and Rd7 Black would have had to part with a whole rook.}) 39. Bb5 Bc3 40.
Rxf7 {Here Korchnoi could have resigned, but he decided to drink the bitter
cup right to the bottom.} Bf6 41. Rd7+ Kc5 42. Bd3 h6 43. Rb7 Ra3 44. a7 Kd5
45. f3 Kd6 {Instant death.} 46. Rb6+ {. In view of Ra6 (after all the bold
a-pawn achieves its cherished goal!).} (46. -- {Thus within literally 24 hours
the match had been turned on its head. The roles were reversed: the chasing
player had become the leader (4-3), and the recent leader had fallen behind.
Two successive defeats were enough to unsettle anyone, even the most
experienced match fighter. It was no surprise that at this point Korchnoi made
use of his one time-out. The changed situation obliged him to go on to the
offensive, but, on the other hand, the time for taking reckless risks had not
yet arrived. --- In the 8th game Korchnoi remained true to his initially
chosen strategy and pinned his hopes on the endgame (cf. Game No.89, note to
White's 7th move), but without success - a draw on the 40th move. This
unpretentious duel also played a significant role: whereas Korchnoi could have
regarded his failure in the 7th game as accidental, the draw in a better
endgame in the 8th game clearly showed that it was unpromising to continue his
strategy of simplification. --- And in the 9th game Korchnoi went in for
complicated play in a Catalan middlegame (cf. Game No.89, note to Black's 5th
move). But the psychological initiative was now on my side, I had more
strength left, and an open battle led to a crushing defeat for Black on the
30th move. As if to confirm Korchnoi's description of me given before the
match, the finish of this game resembled the direct knock-out blow of a boxer.
True, in a chess match one 'knock-out' is not enough for overall victory...}) (
46. -- {In a desperate situation, trailing by 'minus two', Korchnoi
nevertheless found the strength to continue the fight, and the 10th game
became the fiercest in the match. On this occasion my opponent avoided the
Catalan in favour of the Queen's Gambit. I chose the
Tartakower-Makogonov-Bondarev-sky Variation (cf. Game No.20, note to Black's
11th move) and in wild complications I parried the last attack by the 'wounded
animal'. --- The score became 6-4, and I only needed another half point.
However, I wanted to conclude the match not with a full-stop, but an
exclamation mark! The situation obliged Korchnoi to complicate the play, and
after 1 d4 Nf6 2 c4 e6 3 g3 instead of 3...d5 he chose 3...c5 4 d5 exd5 5 cxd5
b5 (also avoiding 5...d6: my opponent preferred to play this set-up with White
- Game No.78) 6 Bg2 d6, but the unexpected 7 b4! (7 Nf3 is more solid: 7...g6
8 Nfd2 Nbd7 9 Nc3 a6, Portisch-Korchnoi, Olympiad, Lucerne 1982) 7...Na6 (the
'Benko Gambit' 7...cxb4 8 a3! bxa3 9 Nxa3 favours White, Zaichik-Vladimirov,
Krasnoyarsk 1981) 8 bxc5 Nxc5 9 Nf3 followed by Nd4-c6 enabled White to seize
the initiative and win on the 32nd move - 7-4! --- Thus on 16th December 1983
this victory in the semi-final Candidates match concluded an important stage
in my chess career, which had given me valuable experience in match play. That
same day, by gaining a draw, Smyslov confidently won his match against Ribli -
6½-4½. There was something symbolic about the fact that both Soviet
grandmasters, who had been disqualified in the summer, in the end became the
finalists in the Candidates cycle.}) (46. -- {Robert Byrne: 'The impetuous
youth from the Caucasus showed staggering patience and composure, displaying
wonderful psychological stability in a difficult situation. In the course of
the match he was able to readjust and, curbing his imagination, acquire a
taste for the simple positions imposed by his opponent with a small number of
pieces, for which Kasparov always harboured a dislike.' --- Raymond Keene:
'Kasparov played like Karpov, mainly exploiting his opponent's mistakes. He is
by nature a skilful and resourceful player, but in this match he has shown
little of his true skill.' --- Viktor Korchnoi: 'After the 6th game I lost
faith in my technique and my seconds. The score was equal, but psychologically
the match was lost. My pre-match impression of Kasparov as a player with one
knock-out punch was wrong. Kasparov is very practical for his age. He takes
risks only when he is sure that they are justified.'}) (46. -- {Some western
commentators suggested that I should thank Korchnoi for accelerating my chess
development and for helping me to grasp the subtleties of positional play.
Indeed, the benefit from this match with an exceptionally strong opponent is
hard to overestimate. For me, a 20-year-old youth, it was a kind maturity test.
Ahead lay the most difficult trials, and not only at the chess board... --- On
the results of 1983, thanks to my wins in the matches with Beliavsky and
Korchnoi, and also the super-tournament in Niksic, I received my second
'Oscar'. Journalists gave me 984 votes, and the world champion Karpov - 918.
By the end of the year my rating was now higher than Karpov's - the first time
this had happened in the entire post-Fischer decade!}) 1-0

[Event "?"]
[Site "?"]
[Date "????.??.??"]
[Round "?"]
[White "Match with Smyslov"]
[Black "?"]
[Result "*"]
[Annotator "Garry Kasparov"]
[PlyCount "1"]
[EventDate "1984.??.??"]
[SourceDate "2012.12.08"]

{Final Candidates Match Kasparov - Smyslov (Vilnius, 9th March - 11th April
1984): 8½-4½.} 1. -- {Vilnius, the White Hall in the Art Museum. It was
here in the spring of 1984 that the final Candidates match took place, between
two opponents who bore absolutely no resemblance to each other. During the
match one of them celebrated his 63rd birthday, while immediately after it the
other celebrated his 21st. Before the start of the Candidates series people
were asking: 'What chance do they have at that age?!' The evergreen Vasily
Smyslov had to show that he still had sufficient strength for a fierce and
uncompromising battle, while I had to find some other qualities to compensate
for my lack of experience. The Interzonal Tournament, the quarter-final and
the semi-final were for each of us a victory against time. The age limits for
the contenders for the crown were stretching in both directions at once. ---
Smyslov's competitive feats staggered the imagination: after passing through
the crucible of fighting Botvinnik for many years, he became world champion
six years before I was born, and a quarter of a century later he reached the
final Candidates match! This was a genuine sensation! Towards the end of his
brilliant career it appeared that the great player was now playing only for
pleasure. But, by tradition, in high-quality positional style. Smyslov's
strength always consisted in his ability to accumulate microscopic advantages
by seemingly unpretentious exchanges and manoeuvres, and in the endgame he was
considered an unsurpassed virtuoso. Apart from his phenomenal technique, his
trumps were his colossal experience and unprecedented emotional drive (which
was noticeable during the London semi-finals). And I approached this match
very seriously, although at heart I was confident of success.} (1. -- {The
forecasts of the world press and most experienced grandmasters were
unequivocally in my favour. But Karpov's comments on the forthcoming final
were rather obscure. To the traditional comparison - 'a competition between
youth and boldness on the one hand, and common sense and experience on the
other', he added: 'This is like the eternal struggle between the raging sea
and the solid land.' As we know, the raging sea is usually unable to overcome
the solid land, as otherwise our world would not exist. In fact, Karpov was
absolutely sure that I would win. When the Ogonyok magazine invited its
readers to predict the result of the match, the editors asked the world
champion to do the same. Karpov's sealed envelope contained an accurate
forecast - 8½-4½ in Kasparov's favour. --- Nevertheless, in the Soviet
press my chances were deliberately played down. Why? Perhaps someone was
afraid of inspiring me excessively, or, God forbid, of boosting my popularity?
Of course, Karpov himself did not harbour any illusions, realising perfectly
well that after the collapse of the Pasadena operation a match with me could
not be avoided. The threat to his title was all too obvious. Karpov is a
cool-headed person and he could objectively and accurately assess the danger.
Just like the people around him, whose position depended on Karpov retaining
his title, and who wanted him to feel for as long as possible that they were
his support.}) (1. -- {Smyslov made a valid point when he said to me just
before the start of our match: 'Young man, if that business of our semi-final
matches had occurred not in the summer of 1983, but slightly earlier or
slightly later, we would never have met in the final.' This subtle thought
demands an explanation: slightly earlier was before November 1982, when
Brezhnev died, and Aliev became a member of the Politburo; slightly later was
early 1984, when the country was headed by Chernenko and Aliev's influence had
sharply waned. --- Asriyan: 'Early in March I phoned Kasparov, to interview
him before the match at the request of the Baku Sport newspaper. It turned out
to be interesting in the extreme and contained some unexpected news. Garry
informed me that two days earlier, 28th February, he had become a member of
the Communist Party. Apparently, before the match with Karpov (there were no
doubts that he would beat Smyslov) he wanted to deprive the world champion and
his supporters of the opportunity to exploit the ideological factor, and to
equalise the chances also on this non-chess front... To become world champion
- everything was subordinated to this aim.' --- In our preparations for the
final 'battle of the generations' first and foremost my trainers and I studied
the experience of the matches with Beliavsky and Korchnoi, to exclude previous
mistakes. And, of course, we carefully analysed the games of my future
opponent, endeavouring to determine his weak points. Our opening preparation
was also extensive: in a match at such a level, especially with such a
harmonious player as Smyslov, much could be decided by successful handling of
the opening. Which is in fact what happened. The encounter developed into two
mini-matches of four games: in one I battled with White against the Cambridge
Springs Defence, while in the other I again upheld the Tarrasch Defence with
Black. It was the winning of these mini-matches that led to my overall victory.
}) (1. -- {Things were also affected by a curious mysticism. Nikitin: 'Just
before the start of the match with Smyslov, Leonid Ostrovsky, a prominent
chess arbiter from Kiev, sent Garry's mother a letter which with staggering
accuracy predicted not only the overall score, but also the result of each
game!' This unknown person claimed to be a parapsychologist, and two months
later, when Nikitin visited him in Kiev, he said about my forthcoming duel
with Karpov: 'You will win the match, but in a fierce struggle.' --- Initially
the forecasts for the Vilnius match by the man from Kiev merely provoked a
smile, but already after two games I became slightly disconcerted. In the 1st,
playing White against the Schlechter Defence, I threw away a solid positional
advantage, and in the 2nd I ended up in an unpleasant position in the Tarrasch
Defence (cf. Game No.91, note to Black's 12th move), and this was probably the
most dramatic moment of the match, largely determining its further course. By
some miracle I managed to extricate myself and then hold out in a difficult
endgame. --- After this I quite confidently - again 'strictly according to
schedule!' - won the 3rd game, in which Smyslov surprised me with the
Cambridge Springs Defence, but I was able to transpose into a better endgame
and exploit the power of my two bishops (cf. Game No.90, note to Black's 9th
move). The 4th game was a Queen's Gambit with 5 Bf4, and I won with Black,
also as predicted, after which I regularly glanced with curiosity at the sheet
with the forecasts, and at times even joked that the prophet could at the same
time have suggested the forthcoming openings...}) (1. -- {The score became 3-1,
and my opponent took the first of his two allotted time-outs. In the 5th game
I was burning with the desire to put an end to these mystical events, which
were forcing me to believe in the super-natural. The ex-champion employed a
novelty with Black in the Botvinnik Variation - the modest 10...Be7 instead of
the usual 10...Nbd7. In a very sharp situation I seized the initiative and
seemed to be close to success, but here Smyslov brilliantly extricated himself,
exploiting my inability to find a decisive strengthening of the position. It
all ended in a 'planned' draw, and I was not exactly delighted with such a
pre-programmed result. --- In the 6th game, after playing the Lasker Defence
to the Queen's Gambit, I quite confidently gained a draw in a somewhat
inferior position. Then, on Smyslov's birthday, I took my first time-out. In
the 7th game my quiet variation against the Cambridge Springs led to a quick
peace agreement. In the 8th, after finding an improvement for Black, I
reverted to the Tarrasch Defence and I even managed to seize the initiative -
but again I was unable to find the right way to build on my advantage. Indeed,
how could I have found it, if on the sheet sent to me a half point was clearly
marked! --- It was in this semi-mystical state that the 9th game was played.})
*

[Event "90: Candidates Final, Vilnius"]
[Site "?"]
[Date "1984.03.30"]
[Round "9"]
[White "Kasparov, G."]
[Black "Smyslov, V."]
[Result "1-0"]
[ECO "D52"]
[Annotator "Garry Kasparov"]
[PlyCount "88"]
[EventDate "1984.??.??"]
[Source "Everyman Chess"]
[SourceDate "2012.11.28"]

1. d4 d5 2. Nf3 Nf6 3. c4 c6 4. Nc3 e6 5. Bg5 Nbd7 6. e3 Qa5 {Smyslov's
frequent employment of the Cambridge-Springs Defence was one of the surprises
of the match: in the ex-world champion's career spanning more than 40 years,
this variation had occurred only a handful of times. In the 1920s and 1930s it
was tested in Alekhine's matches with Capablanca, Bogoljubow and Euwe, and
after the war its popularity greatly waned, but towards the end of the 20th
Century it again rose.} 7. cxd5 $1 {Again, as in the 3rd game, influenced by
the mysterious forecast, I chose the most critical continuation.} (7. Nd2 {is
much quieter, for example:} -- (7... dxc4 8. Bxf6 Nxf6 9. Nxc4 Qc7 10. Be2 (10.
Rc1 $1 {is more accurate}) 10... Be7 11. O-O O-O 12. Rc1 Rd8 13. Qc2 Bd7 14.
Ne4 Nxe4 15. Qxe4 c5 16. dxc5 Bc6 17. Qe5 Qxe5 18. Nxe5 Rd2 19. Bf3 Bxf3 20.
gxf3 Rxb2 21. Rb1 Rxb1 22. Rxb1 Bxc5 23. Rxb7 f6 {with a roughly equal endgame
(Kasparov-R.Rodriguez, Moscow Interzonal 1982)}) (7... Bb4 8. Qc2 {, and Black
is again at a cross-roads:} -- (8... dxc4 9. Bxf6 Nxf6 10. Nxc4 Qc7 11. a3 Be7
12. Be2 (12. g3 O-O 13. Bg2 Bd7 14. b4 b6 15. O-O Rac8 (15... a5 $6 16. Ne5 $1
{- Game No.106 in Volume I of 'My Great Predecessors'}) 16. Rfc1 Rfd8 17. Rab1
{(Kasparov-Averbakh, Kislovodsk 1982), everywhere with a small advantage for
White}) 12... O-O 13. b4 b6 $5 (13... Bd7 14. O-O b6 15. Bf3 {- Game No.125 in
Volume I of 'My Great Predecessors'}) 14. O-O Bb7 15. Bf3 {(Ribli-Smyslov, Las
Palmas Interzonal 1982).}) (8... O-O 9. -- (9. a3 dxc4 $1 10. Bxf6 Nxf6 11.
Nxc4 Bxc3+ 12. Qxc3 (12. bxc3 {is more interesting, as, for example, in
Timman-Kasparov, 6th match game, Prague 1998}) 12... Qxc3+ 13. bxc3 c5 14. Be2
{½-½ (7th game)}) (9. Bh4 {- Game No.104 in Volume I of 'My Great
Predecessors'.}) ({, or} 9. Be2 e5 (9... c5 {is also not bad}) 10. Bxf6 ({
White would at least have something to hope for after} 10. dxe5) ({or} 10. O-O)
10... Nxf6 11. dxe5 Ne4 {with equality (Grünfeld-Keres, Warsaw Olympiad 1935)}
12. cxd5 Nxc3 13. bxc3 Bxc3 14. Rc1 Bxe5 15. dxc6 bxc6 {½-½ (13th game).
And although the result of this last game of the match was not associated with
the opening, after 7 Nd2 it is hard for White to achieve any appreciable gains.
})))) 7... Nxd5 8. Qd2 Bb4 ({After} 8... N7b6 9. Bd3 $5 ({the insipid} 9. Nxd5
Qxd2+ 10. Nxd2 exd5 11. Bd3 a5 {led to equality in Karpov-Kasparov, 47th match
game, Moscow 1984/85}) 9... -- (9... Nxc3 10. bxc3 Nd5 ({or} 10... Na4 11. O-O
Qxc3 12. Qe2) 11. O-O $1 (11. Rc1 Nxc3 12. O-O Bb4 {- Game No.17 in Volume II
of 'My Great Predecessors'}) 11... Qxc3 12. Qe2 {White has an enduring
initiative for the pawn:} Bd6 ({or} 12... Be7 13. Bxe7 Nxe7 14. Ne5 $1 {
(Polugayevsky-Seirawan, Biel Interzonal 1985)}) 13. Nd2 $1 {(Vaganian-Torre,
Biel Interzonal 1985).}) ({. Such a decision was not in the spirit of Smyslov,
who himself aimed for the rapid development of his forces. Incidentally,} 9...
Bb4 {(instead of 9...Nxc3)} 10. Rc1 f6 11. Bh4 Nxc3 12. bxc3 Ba3 13. Rb1 {is
also favourable for White (Vaganian-Smyslov, Montpellier Candidates Tournament
1985).})) 9. Rc1 {We made all these moves, including the next one, in a matter
of minutes.} e5 $6 ({An unsuccessful attempt to improve Black's play compared
with the 3rd game, in which after} 9... O-O 10. Bd3 (10. a3 $5) 10... e5 11.
O-O exd4 (11... h6 $1 12. Bh4 Re8 {is sounder, Alekhine-Bogoljubow, 13th match
game, Berlin 1929}) 12. exd4 f6 13. Bh4 Rd8 14. a3 Bxc3 15. bxc3 Nf8 (15...
Qxa3 $6 16. c4 {is dangerous for Black}) 16. Bg3 Be6 ({if} 16... Bg4 {, then}
17. Be4 $1 Re8 18. c4 {is strong}) 17. Rfe1 Bf7 18. c4 (18. Qb2 $5) 18... Qxd2
19. Nxd2 Nb6 20. Nb3 Na4 (20... Ne6 $5 21. c5 Nd5 22. Na5 Ndf4 $1) 21. Bf1 (21.
Re7 $5) 21... Rd7 $6 (21... b6 $1) 22. Na5 $1 {White gained an enduring
advantage and converted it into a win.}) ({Nowadays Black more often plays} 
9... h6 10. Bh4 c5 11. a3 Bxc3 12. bxc3 b6 13. c4 (13. Bd3 Ba6 {, maintaining
equality}) 13... Qxd2+ 14. Nxd2 N5f6 {(Bareev-Fressinet, Cannes 2002)} ({or} 
14... Ne7 {(Dreev-Grischuk, Poikovsky 2005), with a slightly inferior but
acceptable endgame.})) 10. a3 $5 {(13) From the 3rd game I already knew the
nuances associated with a2-a3, and so without particular difficulty I was able
to find this continuation, an unpleasant one for Black: here it gains in
strength.} (10. Bd3 {was also good}) ({whereas after} 10. dxe5 Nc5 {Black's
idea would have been fully justified.}) 10... Bd6 $6 {(24)} ({It transpires
that if} 10... Bxc3 11. bxc3 -- (11... e4 {there is the reply} 12. c4 $1 Qxa3 (
12... Qxd2+ 13. Nxd2 {is even worse for Black}) 13. cxd5 exf3 14. dxc6 bxc6 15.
gxf3 {with a clear positional advantage.} (15. Bf4 $5 {.})) ({. Of course,
Black can win a pawn, but in the event of} 11... exd4 12. cxd4 Qxa3 13. e4) ({
, or} 11... Qxa3 12. e4 N5f6 13. Bd3 {White's initiative more than compensates
for the minimal material deficit.}) (11... h6 $1 12. Bh4 Qxa3 {is better,
although here too after} 13. e4 ({nothing is given by} 13. Bd3 exd4 14. cxd4
Qb4 $1 {, San Segundo-Nakamura, San Sebastian 2009}) 13... Nf4 ({or} 13... N5f6
14. Bd3) 14. Bg3 g5 15. h4 {White has fine play for the pawn.})) 11. dxe5 {(3)}
({In the event of} 11. Nxd5 Qxd2+ 12. Kxd2 cxd5 13. dxe5 Nxe5 14. Nxe5 Bxe5 15.
Bb5+ Bd7 {Black has a sound position:} 16. Rc5 f6 $1 17. Bh4 (17. Bf4 b6) 17...
Bxb5 18. Rxb5 O-O-O {with equality. But White finds an original way of
relieving the central tension to his advantage.}) 11... Nxe5 {(2)} 12. Nxe5
Bxe5 13. b4 $1 Bxc3 {(5)} (13... Qxa3 $2 {would have been suicidal:} 14. Nxd5
cxd5 15. Bb5+ Kf8 16. O-O Be6 17. f4 Bd6 18. f5 Bxb4 19. Qd4 {and wins.}) 14.
Qxc3 $1 {Taking play into a significantly better endgame.} (14. Rxc3 Nxb4 $6 ({
it is unclear how real White's advantage is if Black simply retreats his queen
-} 14... Qb6 {with the sequel} 15. Rc1 (15. Rc5 h6 16. Bh4 O-O 17. Bd3 a5 18.
Rxa5 Rxa5 19. bxa5 Qb3 20. O-O Qxa3) 15... h6 16. Bh4 O-O 17. Bc4 Be6 18. O-O (
18. e4 $6 Rfe8 $1) 18... Rfe8) 15. e4 $1 ({not} 15. Rc5 $2 Nd3+ $1) 15... -- {
, would have led to interesting complications, for example:} (15... Na6 16.
Bxa6 bxa6 17. -- (17. Rxc6 Qxd2+ 18. Kxd2) ({, or} 17. O-O h6 (17... O-O 18.
Bf6 $1) 18. Be3 $1 (18. Qd6 $6 hxg5 19. Qxc6+ $2 ({while after} 19. Rc5 Qb6 20.
Re5+ Be6 21. Rxe6+ {he has only perpetual check}) 19... Ke7 {is bad for White})
18... O-O 19. Bxh6 $1 Rd8 20. Qg5 Qxg5 21. Bxg5 {, condemning Black to a
depressing struggle for a draw})) (15... f6 {, and after} 16. Bxf6 ({but the
cool-headed} 16. Be3 $1 Na6 17. Bc4 Nc7 18. Bf4 $1 {leaves White with a strong
initiative}) 16... gxf6 17. axb4 Qxb4 18. Bc4 Bd7 (18... Qb1+ $6 {is
unfavourable in view of} 19. Rc1 Qxe4+ 20. Kf1 $1) 19. O-O O-O-O {Black's
defences hold.}) (15... Na2 $2 16. Rc2 Qxd2+ 17. Kxd2 Be6 18. Bc4 {, and the
knight cannot escape.})) 14... Nxc3 15. bxa5 Ne4 16. Bf4 {(3) At first sight,
for the moment nothing terrible for Black is anticipated, but the advantages
of White's position are long-term: two active bishops (whereas the black
knight has no comfortable post), and a pawn majority in the centre; meanwhile
the doubled pawns on the a-file have enabled the b-file to be opened, and now
a frontal attack can be made on the b7-pawn, the defence of which is awkward,
since the b8-square is controlled by the bishop on f4.} O-O {(21)} 17. f3 {(3)}
Nf6 18. e4 Re8 {(10)} ({The attempt to carry out the freeing advance ...b7-b6
ends in failure:} 18... Bd7 19. Kf2 b6 20. Ba6 $1 Bc8 (20... c5 $6 21. Bb7 Rad8
22. Bc7 {and wins}) 21. Be2 c5 (21... Bd7 22. Rhd1) 22. Bd6 $1 ({my earlier
move} 22. Bc7 {is not so clear after} Be6 $1) 22... Rd8 (22... Re8 $6 23. e5 $1
) 23. Bc7 {with a big advantage.}) 19. Kf2 {(2) A curious moment.} a6 {(10) 
A kind of positional capitulation: Black once and for all removes the
impending threat of a5-a6, but now he will be condemned to passive waiting.} ({
However, in the variation} 19... Bd7 20. Rb1 b6 21. Ba6 Bc8 22. Be2 {his
prospects were also very gloomy.}) 20. Be2 {(20)} ({It was tempting to hinder
the development of Black's queenside -} 20. Rb1 Re7 21. Bd6 $6 {, but then
with the exchange sacrifice} Rxe4 $1 22. fxe4 Nxe4+ {and ...Nxd6 he would have
gained chances of a draw.}) 20... Be6 {(2)} 21. Rb1 {(2)} Re7 {With the idea
of ...Rae8 and ...Bc8, securely defending the b7-pawn.} 22. Rhd1 {(2)} (22. Bd6
Rd7 23. Bc5 {would have slightly disrupted Black's plans, but after} Re8 24.
Rb2 Rc7 {all the same the bishop would have reached c8:} 25. Bd6 Rd7 26. Bf4 (
26. e5 $6 Nd5 {is unfavourable for White}) 26... Rde7 {etc.}) 22... Rae8 {(4)}
23. Rb2 {(9) The start of a long-term strategic plan. After the exchange of
one pair of rooks it is important to retain control of the d-file. Black will
be forced also to aim for the exchange of the second pair of rooks, but during
this time White will advance his kingside pawns as far as possible, in order
to win the coming ending with two bishops against bishop and knight. In the
end I managed to carry this out, and I would venture to assert that the
starting position is won even against the best defence by Black (subsequently
there were moments when he could have made things more difficult for his
opponent).} Bc8 {(4)} 24. Rbd2 {(13)} Rd7 {(8)} 25. Rxd7 {(4)} Nxd7 26. g4 Nc5
{(12)} ({Black should have included} 26... h6 27. h4 {and only then played} Nc5
{, in order after g4-g5 to reduce the power of White's pawn phalanx by the
exchange ...hxg5.}) 27. Be3 {(2)} Nd7 {(8)} ({The exchange of rooks by} 27...
Ne6 28. f4 Rd8 29. f5 Rxd1 30. Bxd1 {would not have prevented White from
quickly achieving absolute domination.}) ({It is easier to suggest than to
decide on the sharp} 27... Nb3 $5 28. Bb6 c5 (28... Be6 {is insufficient:} 29.
f4 f6 30. f5 Bf7 31. Rd7) 29. Bc4 Be6 {, when after} 30. Bxe6 ({and after} 30.
Bxb3 $5 Bxb3 31. Rd7 c4 32. Rxb7 c3 33. Be3 $1 Bd1 34. Rb6 Ra8 35. Rc6 c2 36.
g5 Kf8 {the opposite-colour bishops would still have retained some hopes})
30... fxe6 31. Rd7 Rc8 $1 32. Bc7 c4 33. Be5 c3 34. Rxg7+ Kf8 35. Rxh7 Rc5 36.
Rxb7 c2 37. Bb2 {(f4)} c1=Q 38. Bxc1 Nxc1 39. h4 Rc2+ 40. Ke3 e5 41. f4 Rh2 {
Black would retain drawing chances.}) 28. g5 $1 {(9) Now one can talk of a
decisive positional advantage for White: the pawn offensive on the kingside is
bound to bring him victory.} Ne5 {(2)} (28... Re5 $6 {is incorrect in view of}
29. f4 $1 {, when neither} Rxa5 $2 ({nor} 29... Rxe4 $2 30. Bg4 Re7 31. Bc5 $1
{is possible}) 30. Bg4 {.}) 29. Bd4 ({Care is essential: the hasty} 29. Kg3 $6
{would have allowed Black to activate his pieces by} Be6 {with the idea of} 30.
Rb1 Bc4 31. Bd1 Re7 {.}) ({But nowadays I would have played} 29. h4 $1 {
immediately, since in the event of} Be6 30. Rb1 {the bishop would have to
return again to c8.}) 29... Ng6 {(4)} 30. Kg3 {(2)} Nf8 {(5)} 31. h4 {(7)} ({
The thorough - indeed, in the style of Smyslov himself! - preparation of the
pawn storm would have been more methodically concluded by} 31. Bc3 $1 {.
However, here several ways lead to the goal.}) 31... Rd8 {(2)} 32. f4 Be6 {(6)}
({The exchange of rooks -} 32... Ne6 33. Bb6 Rxd1 34. Bxd1 {would not have
helped Black, since his last piece capable of any activity would have
disappeared, and after} g6 35. Bg4 Bd7 36. f5 {the invasion of the white king
would have decided.}) 33. Bc3 $1 {(14)} ({More accurate than} 33. f5 $6 Bb3 34.
Rd2 c5 $1 35. Bc3 Rxd2 36. Bxd2 Nd7 {, when Black activates his game somewhat.}
) 33... Rxd1 34. Bxd1 Nd7 {(2)} ({It was not possible to prevent f4-f5 (} 34...
g6 35. Bc2 {).}) 35. f5 Bc4 36. h5 {(3) Another fighting unit has joined the
attack.} (36. Kf4 f6 $5 37. e5 $1 fxe5+ 38. Bxe5 {is also strong - after} Nxe5
39. Kxe5 {the activity of White's king enables him to win the bishop endgame:}
Bd3 40. Bb3+ Kf8 41. Be6 Ke7 42. Bc8 Kd8 43. Bxb7 Kc7 44. f6 $1 {etc.}) 36...
h6 {(2)} ({If} 36... f6 $2 {there is the decisive} 37. h6 $1 Nc5 38. Bc2 {with
the creation of connected passed pawns. But after the move in the game (and it
was not possible to avoid it) Black has yet another weakness - the h6-pawn.})
37. gxh6 gxh6 38. e5 $1 Nc5 {(2)} 39. Kf4 Bd5 {(2)} 40. Bc2 f6 $6 {(4) The
last move before the time control, made with the flag about to fall.} (40...
Bc4 {was more resilient, but Smyslov, realising that in any event White will
find a way of converting his enormous positional advantage, immediately fixed
the pawn position, hoping to set up a fortress. Alas, this was an illusion...})
41. e6 {(4)} Kg7 42. Bb4 {(4)} (42. Bd4 Nb3 43. e7 Kf7 44. Bxf6 $1 {etc. was
rather more forceful.}) 42... Nb3 {(2)} 43. Ke3 {(now Black is paralysed)} c5 {
(3)} ({The helplessness of a knight in the battle against a passed rook's pawn
is illustrated by the amusing variation} 43... Bc4 44. Bc3 Bd5 45. Be4 $1 Nc5
46. Bxd5 cxd5 47. Kd4 Ne4 48. Bb4 Ng3 49. Kxd5 Nxf5 50. Kc5 Ng3 51. Kb6 Nxh5
52. Kxb7 Nf4 53. Kxa6 Nxe6 54. Kb6 {etc.}) 44. Bc3 {Here the game was
adjourned.} Kf8 {(50) After agonising thought Smyslov sealed this move, but
he resigned without bothering to resume the game;} (44... Nc1 45. Ba4) ({or} 
44... c4 45. Be4 Bc6 46. Bxc6 bxc6 47. Ke4 {(zugzwang) was hopeless for Black.}
) ({White wins by both} 44... Kf8 45. Bxb3 ({and} 45. Be4 Bxe4 46. Kxe4 Ke7 47.
Kd5) 45... Bxb3 46. Bxf6 {.}) (44... -- {This game, like the 3rd, once again
demonstrated the superiority of two bishops in an open position. It
essentially deprived Smyslov's supporters of their last hopes - the score was
now 6-3. --- But Vasily Vasilievich fought to the end. I also continued
playing at full strength and I very much wanted to discover whether the
predictions of the 'Kiev prophet' would be fully realised. --- In the 10th
game (cf. Game No.91, note to Black's 12th move), exploiting my opponent's
uncertain play in a sharp endgame, I seized the initiative and gained good
winning chances. But on the 38th move, as though bewitched by the pre-match
forecast, I suddenly offered a draw. Naturally, the surprised Smyslov agreed.
--- But in the 11th game with Black he unexpectedly engaged me in a 'last and
decisive' battle in the Chigorin Defence. This opening was clearly not in
accordance with his style, and White developed a powerful attack, based on the
power of two bishops (during the match my opponent afforded me this advantage
too often). By the 20th move it seemed that a crushing defeat was inevitable
and that I would at last disgrace the prophet, but mysticism again triumphed:
after my mistake on the 22nd move Smyslov found an unanticipated resource and
literally by a miracle he gained a draw - 7-4! I was very upset that I did not
make the decisive move, which everyone saw apart from me, and on the advice of
Dr. Gasanov I took my second time-out, in order to relax a little, pull myself
together, and get away from chess concerns.}) 1-0

[Event "91: Candidates Final, Vilnius"]
[Site "?"]
[Date "1984.04.07"]
[Round "12"]
[White "Smyslov, V."]
[Black "Kasparov, G."]
[Result "0-1"]
[ECO "D34"]
[Annotator "Garry Kasparov"]
[PlyCount "80"]
[EventDate "1984.??.??"]
[Source "Everyman Chess"]
[SourceDate "2012.11.28"]

{Now came the 12th game, the last genuinely fighting game of the match. The
events in it took a fascinating course. Smyslov was full of resolve to score
at least one win, not even suspecting that the prognosis was not good for him...} 1. d4 d5 2. Nf3 c5 3. c4 e6 4. cxd5 exd5 5. g3 Nf6 6. Bg2 Be7 7. O-O O-O 8.
Nc3 Nc6 9. Bg5 cxd4 10. Nxd4 h6 11. Be3 Re8 12. a3 {Korchnoi's novelty from
the 2nd game of our match.} ({Against me Beliavsky played both} 12. Qa4) ({and
} 12. Qc2 {(cf. Game No.79)}) ({while a little later Karpov played} 12. Qb3 {
(Game Nos. 11, 13 in 'Kasparov vs. Karpov 1975-1985').}) 12... Be6 {Again, as
in the 2nd, 8th and 10th games, the players made the first twelve moves at
blitz speed.} 13. Nxe6 $5 {Another novelty - and an important moment, which
was hardly remarked on by the commentators. After failing to gain an advantage
in the 8th and 10th games, Smyslov became disillusioned with his patent move
13 Kh1.} ({Against Korchnoi I was able to demonstrate the viability of Black's
position after} 13. Qb3 Qd7 14. Nxe6 fxe6 15. Rad1 Bd6 16. Bc1 Kh8 17. Qa4 Qe7
18. e3 a6 19. Qh4 Rac8 {.}) ({But in the Vilnius match an original surprise
awaited me, testifying to the seriousness of Smyslov's opening preparation -} 
13. Kh1 $5 {.} -- ({. In the 2nd game after} 13... Qd7 $6 14. Nxe6 fxe6 15. f4
$1 Red8 16. Bg1 Rac8 17. Qa4 Kh8 18. Rad1 Qe8 19. e4 {White gained the
initiative.}) ({. But then I improved with} 13... Bg4 $1 14. f3 (14. h3 Bd7 $1)
14... Bh5 {with the sequel} 15. Bg1 (15. Nxc6 bxc6 16. Na4 Qc8 $1 17. Bd4 Qe6
18. Rc1 Nd7 {(10th game), in both cases achieving comfortable play}) 15... Qd7
$1 16. Qa4 Bc5 17. Rad1 Bb6 18. Rfe1 Bg6 $1 {(8th game).})) 13... fxe6 {
Black's central pawn pair is threatened with an attack by e2-e4 or f2-f4-f5.
White's next few moves serve as a preparation for these operations.} 14. Qa4
Rc8 {(37)} 15. Rad1 {(2)} Kh8 {(14)} ({In general a useful prophylactic move,
but for the moment there was no particular need for it, and the immediate} 
15... a6 $5 {was worth playing, with the idea of} 16. Kh1 Na5 {.}) 16. Kh1 {
(10) It only remains for White to play f2-f4 and Bg1, and he will achieve a
favourable position similar to that in the 2nd game. But here Black's pieces
are better placed for creating counterplay.} a6 {(4)} ({The immediate} 16...
Na5 $1 {was more accurate, since after} 17. Bxa7 ({in the event of} 17. f4 Nc4
{Black gains an important tempo and the entire rhythm of White's attack is
disrupted (} 18. Bc1 Qb6 $1 {)}) 17... Nc4 {White would have been in danger of
losing his bishop:} 18. Qb3 ({or} 18. Qb5 b6 19. Na4 Nd7 20. e4 Qc7 21. exd5
Qxa7 22. dxe6 Nf6 {, and it is only a question of compensation for the piece})
18... b6 19. e4 Qc7 20. Nb5 Qb7 $1 {.}) 17. f4 $1 {(9)} Na5 {(16)} ({If} 17...
Qa5 {, then} 18. Qc2 $1 {is unpleasant, for example:} Ng4 19. Bg1 Bf6 20. f5 d4
21. Ne4 Ne7 22. Qd2 $1 Qxd2 23. Rxd2 Nxf5 24. Nxf6 gxf6 25. Bxb7 {with the
better endgame.}) 18. f5 $1 {(46)} ({White needs to hurry:} 18. Bg1 $6 Nc4 19.
Qb3 Bc5 $1 {(disclosing the weakness of the e3-square). Now, however, the
situation becomes critical: one more move, and Black's defences in the centre
will collapse, so time is precious for him as well.}) 18... b5 {(13) I
praised this move in both 'Informator' and 'The Test of Time', but now I think
that it is not without its dangers, since it drives the queen to the main part
of the battlefield and helps White to carry out his plan.} ({However, Black
did not have an easy choice:} 18... Rc4 $6 19. Qc2 e5 20. Qd2 $1 (20. Bg1 d4
21. e3 Bxa3 $1 {with equality}) 20... d4 21. Bxh6 -- ({, and after} 21... gxh6
$2 22. Qxh6+ Kg8 23. g4 $1 {White's attack is indeed irresistible.}) (21...
dxc3 $2 {is also bad in view of} 22. Bxg7+ Kxg7 23. Qg5+ {and Rxd8}) ({, while
the two relatively best defences leave White with an enduring initiative:} 
21... Rf8 22. Ne4 Nxe4 (22... gxh6 $2 23. Qxh6+ Nh7 24. b4 Nc6 25. f6 Bxf6 26.
Qh5 $1 {and wins}) 23. Bxe4 Rc8 24. Rc1) ({, or} 21... Ng4 22. Nd5 $1 Nxh6 23.
f6 Bxf6 (23... Bf8 $6 24. Qg5 $1) 24. Nxf6 Rf8 25. Nd5 Rxf1+ 26. Rxf1 Rc6 27.
Qd3 {etc.})) (18... Nc4 19. Bc1 {, and previously I thought that 'Black cannot
avoid the break-up of his centre':} -- (19... Ng4 $2 20. fxe6 Nge3 21. Bxe3
Nxe3 22. Nxd5 {etc.}) (19... exf5 20. Nxd5) ({, or} 19... Nb6 20. Qh4 {(b3) is
also insufficient}) ({, but the sacrifice of the d-pawn by} 19... Qd6 $1 20.
fxe6 b5 {would still maintain equality:} 21. Qb3 (21. Qc2 Qxe6 22. Qg6 Ne5)
21... d4 22. Ne4 (22. Rf4 Qxe6 23. Rdxd4 Bc5 24. Rd3 Ng4) (22. Bf4 Qxe6 23.
Rxd4 Bc5 24. Rd3 Ng4 25. Ne4 Qf5 $1) ({or} 22. e3 d3 23. Nd5 Nxd5 24. Rxd3 Rf8
$1 25. Rfd1 Qxe6 26. Bxd5 Qg4 {etc.}) 22... Nxe4 23. Bxe4 Qxe6 24. Bf5 Qc6+ 25.
Qf3 Rf8 {.})) 19. Qh4 $1 {(6) Now the retribution for the frivolous behaviour
of the black army, which has abandoned its king to the mercy of fate, seems
inevitable. In fact everything is more complicated...} Ng8 {(2) I was proud
of this manoeuvre: 'Using Capablanca's principle "the minimum force in
defence", Black succeeds very quickly in creating effective threats.' Alas,
after the opponent's strongest reply it would have been much harder to do this
than in the game...} ({I condemned the natural move} 19... Nc4 $5 {because of}
20. Bxh6 $1 Nh7 21. Qh5 gxh6 22. fxe6 Ne3 {(?)} ({but in this line Black has
an effective defence:} 22... Bd6 $1 23. Qxh6 Qg5 $1 24. Qh3 Ne3 25. Nxd5 Nxf1
26. Be4 Qg7 27. Rxf1 Rf8 $1 {, and the compensation for the rook does not
promise White anything more than dynamic equality}) 23. Rf7 {'with mate in a
few moves'.}) (19... Nh7 $5 20. Qh5 Nc4 21. Bxh6 $1 {comes to the same thing.})
20. Qh3 $2 {(5) Played, apparently, on general grounds: the sacrifice on h6
may work at some point, and at h3 the queen is more comfortably placed.} ({But
here Smyslov missed his last winning chance in the match -} 20. Qg4 $1 Nc4 21.
Bc1 Bg5 $1 22. fxe6 {. My opponent's second, Viktor Kupreichik, maintained
that after} Bxc1 {(?)} ({the only possibility of resisting was} 22... Nf6 $1 {
(instead of 22...Bxc1?)} 23. Bxg5 Nxg4 24. Bxd8 Rcxd8 25. Rxd5 Rb8 $1 {
followed by ...Nge3 and ...Rxe6. In this dynamic endgame Black would have had
quite good compensation for the pawn and real drawing chances}) 23. Rxd5 $1 Qb6
({things are obviously bad for Black after} 23... Nd6 {(instead of 23...Qb6)}
24. Ne4 Rc6 25. Rfd1) ({or} 23... Ne3 24. Rxd8 Rcxd8 25. Qf4 Bd2 26. Be4 {(h3)}
) 24. -- (24. Rd7 {(?)} Bg5 $1 25. Rxg7 {the game should have ended in a draw,
but this idea is refuted by} Ne5 $1 {.}) ({. On the other hand, there was an
instant win by} 24. Rf7 $1 Bg5 25. Rxg5 hxg5 (25... Nf6 26. Rxf6 $1) 26. Qh5+
Nh6 27. Qg6 $1 Nxf7 ({or} 27... Nf5 28. Qxf5 Nd6 29. Qg6 $1 {and Be4}) 28. Be4
$1 {(Alatortsev).})) 20... Nc4 {(2)} 21. Bc1 {(3)} Bg5 $1 {(2)} 22. fxe6 {(12)}
Bxc1 23. Rxc1 {(12)} ({The intermediate stroke} 23. Rxd5 {is no longer so
strong, if only in view of} Qb6 {, when since} 24. Rxc1 $6 ({White has to save
himself with the help of tactics -} 24. Rd7 $1 Bxb2 25. Rxg7 $1 Qxe6 26. Rff7
Qxf7 27. Rxf7 Nd6) 24... Nxb2 25. Rd2 Na4 {is advantageous to Black.}) 23...
Ne3 {(4)} 24. Nxd5 $1 {(3) Smyslov was obviously counting on this move - the
only chance of regaining his lost initiative. For the exchange White will have
two pawns and prospects of an attack on the light squares.} Nxf1 $1 {(3)} (
24... Rxc1 25. Rxc1 Nxd5 26. Rd1 Qf6 $1 ({of course, not my previous suggestion
} 26... Ne3 $2 27. Rxd8 Rxd8 28. Kg1) ({or} 26... Ngf6 $2 27. e4 $1) 27. Bxd5
Qxb2 {was also acceptable, but this variation seemed more dangerous to me in
view of the rather insecure position of my king and the strong passed pawn on
e6.}) 25. Rxf1 Rf8 {(3)} (25... Qg5 {was also not bad. White's activity is
sufficient only for equality: Black has the exchange for 'one and a half'
pawns, all his pieces are in play, and his knight is about to occupy the
blockading post at e7.}) 26. Nf4 $6 {(8) It would appear that Smyslov was
still dreaming of victory - only this can explain his desire to avoid the
exchange of rooks. But the rook on f1 has no future!} ({Previously I
recommended} 26. Be4 {(?!), but after} Ne7 $1 {Black has somewhat the better
chances:} 27. Nxe7 (27. Nf4 Qd4 $1) 27... Qxe7 28. Bf5 g6 $1 29. Bxg6 Rxf1+ 30.
Qxf1 Qxe6 {.}) ({Therefore White should have played} 26. Rxf8 Qxf8 27. Bf3 {,
retaining compensation for the exchange, sufficient for equality.}) 26... Ne7
27. Qg4 $2 {(9) A serious mistake, with time-trouble imminent. White could
hope for counterplay only by retaining his strong knight on f4.} ({Therefore
he had to play} 27. Qh5 {(with the idea of h2-h4, Qg4 and h4-h5)} Qd4 28. Qh4 (
28. b4 $5) 28... Qc5 $1 29. Bb7 (29. Qxe7 $2 Rxf4 $1) 29... Rc7 30. Bf3 {when
the position is slightly better for Black, but almost equal. --- Smyslov
wanted to advance h2-h4-h5 without the loss of a tempo, but Black's unexpected
reply conclusively tips the scales in his favour.}) 27... g5 $1 {(13)} ({In
the event of} 27... Qd2 28. h4 Qxb2 29. Kh2 {White could still have held on.
In my choice of move I also took account of the opponent's time-trouble,
endeavouring to set him the most difficult problems, even at the risk of a
counterattack. True, the outwardly dangerous move ...g7-g5 has more virtues
than risks.}) 28. Qh3 {(8) Smyslov was pinning his hopes on this reply.} ({
After} 28. Nd3 Rxf1+ 29. Bxf1 Qd5+ 30. e4 Qb3 {White has chronic problems:} 31.
h4 Rf8 32. Be2 gxh4 33. Qxh4 Qxe6 {etc.}) 28... Rf6 $1 {Nevertheless forcing
the retreat of the knight.} 29. Nd3 Rxf1+ 30. Bxf1 Kg7 $1 (30... Qf8 $5 {and ...Qf6! was also not bad, but the king move is stronger. Black has achieved
everything he could have dreamed of, and now he is ready to break through with
his rook into the opponent's position.}) 31. Qg4 {(2)} Qd5+ {(3)} ({The goal
would also have been achieved by} 31... Rc4 32. e4 Qd4 33. Nb4 Rc1 34. Qe2 Rb1
35. Nd3 Nc6 36. h4 Qf6 {etc.}) 32. e4 {The knight on d3 loses its support;} ({
but} 32. Bg2 $2 {was not possible on account of} Rc1+ $1 {with mate.}) 32...
Qd4 33. h4 Rf8 {(2)} ({The immediate} 33... Qe3 {would have led to White's
complete paralysis, but I decided to set a little trap.}) 34. Be2 Qe3 35. Kg2 (
{The attempted pawn exchange} 35. hxg5 {was fatal because of the cunning} h5 $1
{.}) 35... Ng6 36. h5 $2 ({It is hard to offer White any good advice, but even
so} 36. hxg5 hxg5 37. e7 $1 {was more resilient. Now} Nxe7 $6 ({after} 37...
Re8 $1 38. Qf3 Qd2 39. Nc5 Rxe7 40. Qc3+ Qxc3 41. bxc3 Ra7 {White cannot hold
out}) 38. Nf4 $1 {leads to unexpected complications:} Qxe4+ 39. Bf3 Qc2+ 40.
Kh3 Rh8+ 41. Nh5+ Kf8 42. Qd4 Rh7 43. Qf6+ Ke8 44. g4 {- the battle is still
continuing!}) (36. e7 Re8 $1 {.}) 36... Ne7 ({The alternative was} 36... Ne5 $1
37. Nxe5 Rf2+ 38. Kh3 Qc1 $1 (38... Rf4 $2 39. e7 $1 {with a draw}) 39. Bd1 Qd2
{, when the curtain comes down.}) 37. b4 Kh7 {(5)} ({Or} 37... Nc6 $5 {, but
all the same White is practically in zugzwang.}) 38. Kh2 Rd8 39. e5 Rxd3 40.
Bxd3+ Qxd3 {. In the 13th game the 'planned' draw was agreed on the 16th move 
(cf. Game No.90, note to White's 7th move), and this mystical match concluded
ahead of schedule with the predicted score 8½-4½. --- The basis of my
win was successful play with Black. I now knew that in matches a player's mood
directly depends on this: if with Black all is going well, you can calmly try
to exploit the advantage of the white pieces. On the whole I was better in
complicated situations, but I gained the greatest satisfaction from two
endgames, where I managed - against none other than Smyslov! - to convert a
comparatively small positional advantage. --- Yes, I did not always win the
won positions, but in general this was a successful match for me. Not once did
I have a really bad position, although there were problems in the 2nd and 12th
games. And I was very happy that I did not lose a single game: after all, the
next match, the main one with Karpov, was to be played not only to six wins,
but also to six defeats...} 0-1

[Event "?"]
[Site "?"]
[Date "????.??.??"]
[Round "?"]
[White "'Return Match of the Century'"]
[Black "?"]
[Result "*"]
[Annotator "Garry Kasparov"]
[PlyCount "1"]
[EventDate "1984.??.??"]
[SourceDate "2012.12.08"]

{Four-round match USSR v. Rest of the World (London, 24-29 June 1984) - 21-19 
(5-5; 6-4; 5½-4½; 4½-5½). Board results: 1. Karpov-Andersson - 2½-1½; 2. Kasparov-Timman - 2½-1½ etc.} 1. -- {To celebrate my victory
in the final Candidates match against Smyslov, a reception was held in the
Spartak Sports Society Chess Club in Moscow with the participation of
Petrosian and Tal. When someone in the audience asked me: 'What do you think
of Fischer?', I replied: 'This question would be better answered by his
opponents, the living legends who are present here!' On hearing these words,
the dozing Tal (who was slightly sedated) raised his head and muttered:
'Barely living legends...' Petrosian threw him an angry glance, but then
picturesquely registered his acceptance, gave in and burst out laughing...
Although he was already seriously ill, he nevertheless agreed to help me
prepare for the forthcoming world championship match with Karpov in the autumn,
and we even met on a couple of occasions. --- Petrosian was dreaming of
playing that summer in the USSR v. Rest of the World match, and was preparing
to travel with the team, refusing to believe that his illness was incurable.
But, alas, his days were numbered, and on 13th August Tigran Vartanovich
passed away. The games and lengthy conversations with the Great Master were
enormously beneficial to me, and much of his valuable experience came in
useful in the fight for the world crown. His deep philosophical approach to
everything associated with chess helped in developing staunchness of spirit,
and in holding out in the most difficult situations.} (1. -- {At the end of
June 1984 both Karpov and I had to interrupt our preparations for a week and
head off to London for the long-awaited second USSR v. Rest of the World match.
The first, I should remind you, called the 'Match of the Century', took place
in 1970 and was won by the USSR team - 20½-19½. Not surprisingly, before
the London meeting the world press began talking about the 'Return Match of
the Century'. Over the intervening 14 years the team line-ups (each had ten
main players and two reserves) had changed almost beyond recognition - of the
previous combatants there remained only Korchnoi (who had switched teams),
Larsen, Polugayevsky, Smyslov and Tal. --- Our first three boards were well
known: Karpov, Kasparov and Polugayevsky. But our opponents, with the aim of
improving their results, cunningly changed their board order: Korchnoi was
sent to torment Polugayevsky, the impregnable Andersson was to 'man the gate'
against Karpov, and the experienced Timman was pitched against the 'excitable'
Kasparov. This idea only partially justified itself: Korchnoi did indeed
defeat Polugayevsky (+1=3, including a draw with the reserve Tukmakov), but
Karpov and I beat our opponents by the same score. However, the best result
was achieved by Beliavsky: by twice beating Seirawan on board 6 and scoring 1½ out of 2 against the reserve Larsen, he notched up 3½ out of 4! As a
result, revenge was not gained: the Soviet team also won this match - 21-19.
--- I enjoyed an obvious advantage in my mini-match with Timman - I was
constantly pressing, but in the first three games I did not manage to win.
Before the 4th and last round our team was ahead by 'plus three' and was
already close to victory in the match, but I wanted to make a worthy
contribution to the overall aggregate and also to keep up with Karpov!}) *

[Event "92: Return Match of the Century, London"]
[Site "?"]
[Date "1984.06.28"]
[Round "4"]
[White "Kasparov, G."]
[Black "Timman, J."]
[Result "1-0"]
[ECO "D55"]
[Annotator "Garry Kasparov"]
[PlyCount "67"]
[EventDate "1984.??.??"]
[Source "Everyman Chess"]
[SourceDate "2012.11.28"]

1. d4 Nf6 2. c4 e6 3. Nf3 d5 4. Nc3 Be7 5. Bg5 O-O 6. e3 {(6)} h6 (6... Nbd7 {
- Game No.33.}) 7. Bxf6 (7. Bh4 {- Game Nos. 20, 41.}) 7... Bxf6 8. Qc2 ({
Instead of the approved} 8. Qd2 {(Game No.54), I chose a fresh and, for me,
semi-experimental continuation with my favourite queenside castling, which had
been tried in the recent game Lerner-Georgadze (Nikolaev 1983). After a brief
analysis it seemed quite promising to me.}) 8... c5 {The main reply.} (8... Na6
$5 9. Rd1 c5 {- Game No.56 in 'Kasparov vs. Karpov 1975-1985'.}) 9. dxc5 Qa5 {
(8)} ({It soon transpired that the simple} 9... dxc4 $1 {is better, as in the
27th game of my first match with Karpov (Game No.31 in 'Kasparov vs. Karpov
1975-1985').}) 10. cxd5 exd5 {(3)} 11. O-O-O $1 {The key idea of the new
variation. According to Larsen, an isolated pawn should not be blockaded, but
attacked and captured!} (11. Qd2 Be6 {(Botvinnik-Bondarevsky, Leningrad 1941)})
({or} 11. Rd1 Be6 {(Portisch-Ivkov, Budapest 1960) is far more modest.}) 11...
Be6 $2 {(12) But this is already a serious mistake, after which Black is
simply unable to get out of trouble.} (11... Bxc3 $1 {is correct, and after}
12. Qxc3 {one of two lines:} -- (12... Qxc3+ 13. bxc3 Be6 14. Nd4 Rc8 (14...
Nd7 15. c6) 15. e4 $1 {with another divergence:} -- (15... Rxc5 $2 {, and in
the Lerner-Georgadze game, and also in the forgotten source game
Szilagyi-Pogats (Budapest 1952), after} 16. Nxe6 $6 ({however, awaiting Timman
was} 16. exd5 $1 {, when} Bxd5 $2 {, is bad in view of} ({or} 16... Bd7 17. c4
{retaining the extra pawn (Yusupov-Inkiov, Sofia 1984)}) 17. Nb3 $1 Bxb3 18.
Rd8+ Kh7 19. axb3 {with the inevitable win of the knight}) 16... fxe6 17. exd5
exd5 18. Rxd5 Rxc3+ 19. Kb2 Rc8 {Black held this slightly inferior endgame.}) (
15... dxe4 16. Nxe6 fxe6 17. Bc4 Kf7 18. Rhe1 Na6 $1 19. Bxa6 bxa6 20. Rxe4
Rxc5 21. Rd7+ Kf6 22. Kd2 $1 ({in correspondence games} 22. Kc2 Rac8) ({and} 
22. Re3 Rf5 {have been tried, in each case with equality}) 22... Rac8 23. Rxa7
R8c6 (23... Rxc3 24. Rxa6) 24. Rf4+ Ke5 25. Rf3 {with an extra pawn, but Black
can hope for a draw})) (12... Qxa2 {(this capture is nevertheless better than
its poor reputation)} 13. Bd3 Nc6 {(½-½, Nikolic-Ljubojevic, Wijk aan Zee
1986), and here I was planning} 14. Kd2 $1 {with some advantage - subsequently
this move brought White success in both over-the-board and correspondence
tournaments.})) 12. Nxd5 Rc8 {(37)} (12... Bxd5 13. Rxd5 Qxa2 14. Bc4 Qa1+ (
14... Bxb2+ $2 15. Kd1 $1 {and wins}) 15. Qb1 Qa4 16. Qa2 {is also
advantageous to White (Sturua-Klovans, Lvov 1984).}) 13. Kb1 $1 {The point of
the entire plan;} ({after} 13. Nxf6+ $2 gxf6 {Black's counterplay could have
become threatening.}) ({Nothing was given by} 13. b4 $6 Qa3+ 14. Kb1 Bxd5 15.
Rxd5 Nc6 (15... Qxb4+ {is also possible}) 16. Qb3 Qxb3+ 17. axb3 Nxb4 18. Rd7
Rd8 $1 {, quickly regaining the pawn. --- Here Timman again sank into thought:
Black faces a difficult choice.}) 13... Bxd5 {(22)} ({It turns out that} 13...
Rxc5 14. b4 $1 Rxc2 15. Nxf6+ gxf6 16. bxa5 {is clearly in White's favour, for
example:} -- (16... Rc8 17. Nd4 Nc6 18. Nxe6 fxe6 19. Bc4) ({, or} 16... Rxf2
$6 17. Rd8+ Kg7 18. Nd4 {- annotating the game in 'Informator', I gave this
variation as winning, but nine years later it occurred in a grandmaster game!
After} Bxa2+ 19. Ka1 (19. Kc1 $5) 19... f5 20. Bd3 {White won without
difficulty (van Wely-Geller, Tilburg 1993).})) ({Attempts to develop the
knight immediately are also unsatisfactory:} 13... Nd7 $2 14. b4 $1 Qd8 15. Bb5
) (13... Nc6 $6 14. Nxf6+ gxf6 15. a3) ({or} 13... Na6 $6 14. Bxa6 bxa6 15. Qd2
$1 Qxc5 16. Nxf6+ gxf6 17. Nd4 {etc.}) 14. Rxd5 Nc6 15. Bc4 $2 {(4) My eyes
were dazzled by the mass of tempting possibilities!} ({The natural move} 15. a3
$1 {seemed too cautious to me, but after} Ne7 16. Rd7 $1 Rxc5 17. Qb3 Rac8 18.
Bd3 {White is a more than healthy pawn to the good.}) 15... Nb4 {(5)} ({Now} 
15... Ne7 $2 16. Rd7 $1 Rxc5 {is catastrophic for Black in view of} 17. Nd2 {.}
) 16. Qd2 $1 ({There was no reason to play} 16. c6 Qc7 17. Qb3 bxc6 18. Rd2
Rab8 {with hopes of counterplay.}) 16... Rxc5 17. Rxc5 Qxc5 18. Rc1 Qb6 $2 {(1)
Returning the favour.} (18... Qe7 {, my 'Informator' recommendation, demanding
accurate play of White, is also insufficient:} 19. a3 $1 Qe4+ 20. Ka1 a5 21.
Qd1 $1 (21. Nd4 $6 Nc6 $1 {with some compensation for the pawn}) {, and if}
21... Rd8 {, then} 22. Qa4 b5 23. Bxb5 $1 (23. Qxb5 $4 Qc2 $1 {, and Black
rejoices}) 23... Bxb2+ 24. Kxb2 Nd3+ 25. Kb1 Nb4+ 26. Ka1 {and wins.}) ({But
Black would have retained real chances of saving the game after} 18... Qf5+ $1
19. Ka1 Rd8 $1 {(an unexpected resource!)} 20. Qxb4 $1 Qc2 $1 21. Bxf7+ $1 Kh7
$1 22. Bg6+ ({or} 22. Rb1 Rd1 23. Nd2 Rxd2 24. Bg6+ Qxg6 25. a3) 22... Qxg6 23.
a3 Qxg2 {and although the material advantage is on White's side, he would have
serious cause to regret that he did not play 15 a3!.}) 19. Qd7 $1 {(24) 
Apparently a move that simply suggests itself, but before it was made all the
nuances arising in the event of leaps by the black knight had to be taken into
account.} Rf8 {(9)} (19... Nd5 $2 20. Bb3) ({or} 19... Nd3 $5 20. Rc2 {are
weak alternatives.}) ({Apparently Timman had been counting on} 19... Nxa2 $5
20. -- ({, say} 20. Bxf7+ $2 Kf8 21. Nd4 Bxd4 22. exd4 Rd8 23. Rc8 Rxc8 24.
Qxc8+ ({after} 24. Bxa2 $4 Qg6+ {it is Black who gives mate!}) 24... Kxf7 25.
Kxa2 Qxd4 26. Qxb7+ Kg8 {with drawing chances in the queen endgame.}) ({. But
here he noticed that after} 20. Rc2 $1 {the knight has no good move:} Nb4 ({or
} 20... Nc3+ 21. Kc1 Ne4 22. Qxf7+ $1 ({but not my earlier variation} 22. Bxf7+
Kh8 23. Ne5 $2 {in view of} Nd6 $1) 22... Kh8 23. Qd5 Nc5 24. Be2 {with an
obvious advantage}) 21. Ne5 $1 Bxe5 22. Bxf7+ Kh7 23. Rc8 Rxc8 24. Qxc8 h5 25.
f4 $1 {and wins.})) 20. Qb5 $1 {(5)} Qd6 {(6)} ({It is hard to recommend the
endgame after} 20... Qxb5 21. Bxb5 Rd8 22. a3 {as being the lesser evil.}) 21.
e4 {(7) 'An accurate move, creating the threat of e4-e5', I commented in the
magazine '64'.} ({But the modern computer considers the crude} 21. Qxb7 $1 {to
be more accurate:} Rb8 (21... Kh8 22. Qe4 $1) 22. Qxf7+ Kh8 23. b3 {and wins.})
21... Nc6 ({If} 21... Qe7 {, then} 22. e5 Bg5 23. Nxg5 hxg5 24. e6 $1 {.}) 22.
Bd5 ({Again} 22. Qxb7 $1 {was more forceful:} Rb8 ({or} 22... Ne5 23. Qd5 $5 {
etc.}) 23. Qxf7+ Kh8 24. b3 {.}) 22... a6 $2 {(7) Giving up a second pawn is
equivalent to capitulation.} (22... Qd7 $6 23. Bxc6 bxc6 24. Qxc6) ({or} 22...
Rb8 23. Qb3 $1 Qc7 24. h4 {with the threat of g2-g4-g5 was also bad for Black.}
) ({However, he should have tried to save the game with the help of
opposite-colour bishops by} 22... Nd4 $1 23. -- (23. Nxd4 Bxd4 24. Rd1 Qb6 25.
Qxb6 Bxb6) ({, or} 23. Qxb7 Nxf3 24. gxf3 Qxh2 25. Qxa7 Qe5 26. Rc2 h5 {with
counterplay.}) ({. After this I was intending to play} 23. Qd3 $1 Qb6 (23...
Nxf3 $2 24. Bxf7+ $1) 24. e5 Nxf3 25. exf6 Ne5 26. Qf5 {, considering White's
advantage after the forced} gxf6 {to be quite convincing. But here there would
still have been work to do!})) (22... Ne5 23. Ne1 $1 {.}) 23. Qxb7 {(7)} Ne5 ({
It is easy to see that there is no way of saving the game:} 23... Nb4 24. Qc7)
({or} 23... Ne7 24. Bb3 $1 {etc.}) 24. Rc8 Rxc8 25. Qxc8+ Kh7 26. Qc2 $1 {(2)}
(26. Qc2 {with the cunning idea} Nxf3 $2 27. e5+ $1 {.}) 26... Kg8 {(6)} 27.
Nd2 {(6)} g5 {Because f2-f4 was threatened, but now the white knight heads for
f5.} 28. a3 {(3)} Kg7 {(2)} 29. Nf1 {(9)} Qb6 30. Ng3 {(2)} Kg6 31. Ka2 {(2)}
h5 32. Qc8 {(2)} h4 {(7)} 33. Qg8+ {(3)} Bg7 34. Nh5 {(6) Times: 1.45-2.27.
--- It was pleasant for me to draw level with Karpov. My win was even the more
impressive looking one, since at that time and until the end of the 1980s
Timman was the strongest of the 'indigenous' western players.} 1-0

[Event "93: Simultaneous Display, London"]
[Site "?"]
[Date "1984.06.30"]
[Round "?"]
[White "Kasparov, G."]
[Black "Conquest, S."]
[Result "1-0"]
[ECO "D16"]
[Annotator "Garry Kasparov"]
[PlyCount "55"]
[EventDate "1984.??.??"]
[Source "Everyman Chess"]
[SourceDate "2012.11.28"]

{Immediately after the 'Return Match of the Century' I was invited to take
part in a fascinating event - the first simultaneous display in history, where
the moves were transmitted via the cosmos by satellite. The idea of such a
simul' arose literally in passing, and everything was prepared within 48 hours.
Play was on ten boards. I was in London, along with the five best English
junior players, selected by the British Chess Federation. A further five
opponents - participants in the recent USA Junior Championship, among them
future grandmasters, 12-year-old Ilya Gurevich and 16-year-old Patrick Wolff -
played in New York. I defeated them 5-0, but the English players put up far
more tenacious resistance. --- I remember there being a pretty mating finish
in the game with a future grandmaster, 17-year-old Stuart Conquest.} 1. d4 d5
2. c4 c6 3. Nf3 Nf6 4. Nc3 dxc4 5. a4 Bg4 6. Ne5 Bh5 7. f3 ({The alternative is
} 7. g3 {.}) 7... Nfd7 8. Nxc4 e5 9. Ne4 {I was only very superficially
acquainted with this variation, but I knew that the knight move was the main
one;} ({although} 9. Be3 {is also not bad, K.Grigorian-Vasyukov, 42nd USSR
Championship, Leningrad 1974.}) 9... Bb4+ 10. Bd2 Qe7 11. Bxb4 {The most
popular line.} (11. dxe5 O-O 12. Rc1 ({or} 12. f4 {leads to double-edged play
with slightly the better chances for White.})) 11... Qxb4+ 12. Qd2 Qxd2+ 13.
Kxd2 exd4 14. Ned6+ Ke7 15. Nxb7 {This is not bad - what a pawn to capture!} ({
But} 15. Nf5+ $5 {is more timely:} Kf6 (15... Kd8 16. Nxd4 {is no better,
Bagirov-Podgaets, Tbilisi 1973}) 16. Nxd4 Rd8 17. e4 Nc5 18. Ke3 Rxd4 19. Kxd4
Nb3+ 20. Kc3 Nxa1 21. Be2 Nd7 22. Rxa1 {, and Black is unable to equalise:} --
(22... Nc5 {(Polugayevsky-Hübner, Tilburg 1985)} 23. g4 $1 Bg6 24. h4 {
(Polugayevsky) with an unpleasant initiative}) (22... Ke7 23. b4 (23. Na5 $5
Rb8 24. Ba6 $1) 23... f6 24. Rd1 Nb6 (24... Rb8 25. Ne3 $5) 25. Na5 Nxa4+ $6 (
25... Rb8 26. Ba6 $5 {- Kramnik}) 26. Kb3 Nb6 27. Nxb7 {(Kramnik-Damljanovic,
Moscow Olympiad 1994). In this game, which I witnessed with my own eyes, White
won easily, and the soon the entire variation almost disappeared from
tournament play.})) 15... Na6 16. Nba5 $6 {A dubious venture: by rushing to
bring back his knight, White only loses time.} ({The modest} 16. e3 $1 {was
more appropriate:} dxe3+ (16... Ndc5 $6 17. Nxc5 Nxc5 18. Na5 {is advantageous
to White, Adorjan-Flear, Szirak 1986}) 17. Nxe3 {with a small advantage.})
16... Nb4 {(now Black has an excellent game)} 17. Ra3 Nc5 (17... Kf6 {was also
not bad, when a possible continuation is} 18. h4 Nc5 19. g4 Bg6 20. g5+ Ke7 21.
h5 Bf5 {with equality.}) 18. e3 dxe3+ ({A temporary pawn sacrifice was also
possible -} 18... Rhd8 $5 19. exd4 Kf8 {, hiding the king.}) 19. Rxe3+ Kf6 20.
g4 Rad8+ 21. Ke2 Bg6 22. h4 {In this dynamic middlegame-type position Black
has to concern himself with his advanced king. But here my opponent clearly
overestimated his chances.} h5 $2 ({Of course, Black should have given a
bishop check -} 22... Bd3+ {, and after} 23. Kf2 Bxf1 24. Rxf1 Rhe8 25. Rxe8
Rxe8 26. b3 {the balance would have been maintained.}) (22... h6 {was also
acceptable. No sooner had Conquest placed his pawn on h5, than I saw a fitting
refutation of Black's aggression.}) 23. g5+ Kf5 24. Nb7 $3 ({Apparently Black
was attracted by the counter-attacking variation} 24. Re5+ $2 Kf4 25. Rxc5 Nd3
26. Rxc6 Rhe8+ {, in which an active role is played by his king. But after the
sudden diversionary knight sacrifice he himself ends up in a mating net!})
24... Rd4 ({After} 24... Nxb7 {White wins with the problem-like} 25. Re4 $1 {
(with the mating threats Ne3 and Bh3)} Bh7 26. Bh3+ Kg6 27. Ne5# {.}) 25. Kf2
$1 {(again a spectacular move: the white king joins the attack)} Rxc4 (25...
Kf4 26. Nxc5 {.}) 26. Kg3 $1 Rxh4 (26... Re4 27. fxe4+ Nxe4+ 28. Kf3 {was also
hopeless, for example:} Nd2+ ({or} 28... Ke5 29. Nc5 Nc2 30. Rxe4+ Bxe4+ 31.
Nxe4 Nd4+ 32. Ke3 Nf5+ 33. Kd2 $1 Kxe4 34. Bd3+ {, and Black nevertheless
loses a piece (} Ke5 35. Re1+ Kf4 36. Rf1+ {etc.)}) 29. Ke2 $1 Nxf1 30. Rxf1+
Kg4 31. Nd6 Bd3+ 32. Rxd3 Nxd3 33. Nxf7 $1 {.}) 27. Rxh4 Nxb7 $2 {A blunder;} (
{but} 27... Nd5 28. Bh3+ Kxg5 29. Re5+ Kf6 30. Rxd5 cxd5 31. Nxc5 {was also
depressing.}) 28. Rxb4 {. Altogether I won seven games and three ended in a
draw, including the game with the youngest participant, the 12-year-old
schoolboy and future top English grandmaster Mickey Adams, being unable to
breach him in the Caro-Kann (incidentally, four years later in a simul'
against young stars in Cannes I also dropped one and a half points: the more
grown-up Adams beat me, while our Misha Ulybin gained a draw). --- After the
simul' we jointly commented on the games - and this despite the fact that we 
(I have in mind my opponents across the ocean) were thousands of kilometres
apart! For those times this was an extraordinary event, and as a farewell I
fervently declared in English: 'Scientific progress should above all serve the
aims of peace and mutual understanding between the nations of our planet!' ---
From London I set off to Barcelona, where for the second successive year I was
presented with an elegant little statue - the chess 'Oscar' for 1983, and then
I rapidly returned home and continued preparing for my first match for the
world crown.} 1-0

[Event "?"]
[Site "?"]
[Date "????.??.??"]
[Round "?"]
[White "First Match with Karpov: 84/85"]
[Black "?"]
[Result "*"]
[Annotator "Garry Kasparov"]
[PlyCount "1"]
[EventDate "1984.??.??"]
[SourceDate "2012.12.08"]

{The Karpov-Kasparov match for the world championship (Moscow, 9th September -
15th February 1985) was played to the first to win six games, draws not
counting, but after 48 games, with the score standing at +5-3(=40), it was
terminated 'without a final result'.} 1. -- {The dramatic course of my
unlimited match with Anatoly Karpov and the whodunit-like story of its
termination are covered in detail in 'Kasparov vs. Karpov 1975-1985', and so
here I will mention only the most memorable moments of the battle and will
give two of my best games. --- A match for the crown is fundamentally
different to any Candidates match, even the most difficult and intense. In
particular because here the pretender is opposed by the world champion himself
- a fighter, who is far more skilled in play at the highest level, with a
completely different resistance threshold. In order to overcome him, you must
regularly make moves of the highest quality, and this demands chess and
psychological preparation of a far more serious nature. My experience,
acquired in the qualifying cycle, although extremely useful, proved to be
insufficient. The level of the problems which Karpov set me in our first match,
and I had to set him, exceeded by an order of magnitude that which came before.
--- My group of constant chess helpers consisted of four people: Nikitin,
Shakarov, Vladimirov and Timoshchenko. A fifth - the Lvov grandmaster Iossif
Dorfman - appeared only at the start of the main match. In addition, the
Hungarian grandmaster Andras Adorjan also participated in the last pre-match
training session. Later he was also at the match for several weeks, during its
most unpleasant period. After it Andras stopped coming to our training
sessions (he did not fit into the team), but he helped me both in the second
match with Karpov (1985), and my short matches with Andersson, Timman (1985)
and Miles (1986). It was he who gave me the idea of taking up the Grünfeld
Defence, in which he was a great expert. Andras liked very much analysing
'his' openings and in them he would find new, sometimes unexpected ideas.} (1.
-- {Nikitin: 'This was a small force to carry out the great amount of work
planned, but no one else came to help us: they were afraid of incurring the
wrath of the existing champion and his patrons. And the list of players
enlisted to help Karpov prepare, apart from his official seconds Balashov and
Zaitsev, was initially simply frightening: Geller, Polugayevsky, Makarychev,
Georgadze, Mikhalchishin, Vaganian, Ubilava and Podgaets (in the second match
there was also Salov and Zhelyandinov). Plus young army masters, serving in
the so-called sports company and carrying out the donkey work of compiling
selections of games.' --- The first stage of this marathon match was
distinguished by my nervousness and my numerous mistakes. This applied even to
my favourite dynamic positions, where previously I felt very confident, but
now I was making bad oversights. Surprises during a game made me feel
uncomfortable and undermined my fighting spirit. In the 3rd game, after
encountering an excellent preparation by the opponent to my new move, I became
rattled and my response was not nearly at the standard of a world championship
match. Emotions overcame cold rationality, which is so necessary for such
matches. After this failure, negative feelings developed in my sub-conscious,
leading to a lowering in the standard of my play, and to a loss of
completeness and logic. --- But Karpov played in his customary cool-headed
manner, endeavouring to calculate variations accurately and fully exploit each
of my errors. The stage from the 6th to the 9th games proved disastrous for me:
three defeats, and all with tragic, crude, at times inexplicable mistakes.}) *

[Event "94: World Championship Match, Moscow"]
[Site "?"]
[Date "1984.09.26"]
[Round "6"]
[White "Kasparov, G."]
[Black "Karpov, A."]
[Result "0-1"]
[ECO "E15"]
[Annotator "Garry Kasparov"]
[PlyCount "140"]
[EventDate "1984.??.??"]
[Source "Everyman Chess"]
[SourceDate "2012.11.28"]

1. d4 Nf6 2. c4 e6 3. Nf3 b6 4. g3 Ba6 5. b3 Bb4+ 6. Bd2 Be7 7. Bg2 O-O 8. O-O
d5 9. Ne5 c6 10. Bc3 Nfd7 11. Nxd7 Nxd7 12. Nd2 Rc8 13. e4 b5 14. Re1 dxc4 15.
bxc4 Nb6 16. cxb5 cxb5 17. Rc1 Ba3 18. Rc2 Na4 19. Ba1 Rxc2 20. Qxc2 Qa5 21.
Qd1 Rc8 22. Nb3 Qb4 23. d5 exd5 24. exd5 Nc3 {One of the critical moments of
the entire match. Here it would have done no harm for me to remember that in
my childhood I liked arbitrarily to divide the chess board into right and left
halves, and see what the balance of forces was in each of them. In the given
instance all Black's pieces are bunched together on the queenside, having left
their lone king to its fate. The evaluation of the position is obvious: White
has every chance of building up an irresistible attack.} 25. Qd4 $2 ({To this
day I simply can't understand why I went in for the exchange of queens,
instead of playing in my style -} 25. Qh5 $1 {(not the only strong queen move,
but the most resolute!)} -- ({, when} 25... Nxd5 26. Re4 Qd6 27. Rd4 {is bad
for Black}) ({, as is} 25... Qf8 26. Bh3 Rc7 27. Re3 Nxa2 28. Bxg7 $1 Qxg7 29.
Re8+ Bf8 30. d6 $1) ({, or} 25... Nxa2 26. Qe5 $1 Qf8 (26... f6 27. Qe6+ Kh8
28. Re4 (28. Bxf6 $5) 28... Qd6 29. Qf5 {with crushing threats}) 27. Be4 $1 {
(threatening Qf5)} Kh8 28. Qh5 Qg8 29. Bf5 $1 Rd8 {(otherwise Re4-h4)} 30. Qg5
$1 Rf8 (30... Rxd5 $2 31. Qxg7+ $1) (30... Nb4 31. Bc3) (30... Bb4) 31. Qd2 $1
{. A fantastic position, which could well have rivalled the finish to the 16th
game of the second match (1985). White gains a decisive material advantage: 30.
..Nb4 31 Bc3, or 30...Bb4 31 Qxa2 Bxe1 32 Qxa6. It is clear that 25 Qh5!
would have brought me a swift and spectacular win, and with it the score 1-1.
The entire match would have turned out differently! But how - that I do not
know...})) 25... Qxd4 26. Nxd4 Nxa2 27. Nc6 $2 {Some kind of black-out...} (27.
Nf5 $1 {suggested itself, with very strong threats. Botvinnik, who was
following the game, said: 'Now Kasparov will certainly play his knight to f5 -
this is completely in his style.' But the terrible thing is that this more
than natural move (attacking the g7-pawn and threatening d5-d6), which was
heatedly discussed in the press centre, was one that I hardly even considered!
Although, no way for Black to save the game is apparent - in all variations it
is the powerful passed d-pawn that decides matters. But now, as one
commentator said, 'the remainder of the game was torture for White'.}) 27...
Bc5 $1 28. Bh3 $6 (28. Ne7+ $1 Bxe7 29. Rxe7 {would have retained the
initiative and chances of confusing my opponent, who was in time-trouble.})
28... Ra8 29. Bd4 Bxd4 30. Nxd4 Kf8 $1 {Neutralising the swift-moving passed
pawn.} 31. d6 Nc3 $1 32. Nc6 $2 {And this is already the decisive mistake.} ({
'White should have forced a draw -} 32. Bg2 Rd8 (32... Re8 $6 33. Ra1) 33. Bc6
Bc8 34. Nxb5 {.' (Yusupov)}) 32... Bb7 33. Bg2 ({After} 33. Bd7 g6 34. Re3 {
White would lose his passed pawn -} b4 35. Nxb4 Ne4 {, after which the a-pawn
can be stopped only at the cost of a piece.}) 33... Re8 $1 34. Ne5 ({Or} 34.
Ra1 Bxc6 35. Bxc6 Re6 $1 {, winning a pawn.}) 34... f6 35. d7 Rd8 36. Bxb7 fxe5
{. And after mistakes by both sides Black nevertheless won on the 71st move.
One of the most nightmarish games in my career!} 37. Bc6 Ke7 38. Bxb5 Nxb5 39.
Rxe5+ Kxd7 40. Rxb5 Kc6 41. Rh5 h6 42. Re5 Ra8 43. Ra5 Kb6 44. Ra2 a5 45. Kf1
a4 46. Ke2 Kc5 47. Kd2 a3 48. Kc1 Kd4 49. f4 Ke4 50. Kb1 Rb8+ 51. Ka1 Rb2 52.
Rxa3 Rxh2 53. Kb1 Rd2 54. Ra6 Kf5 55. Ra7 g5 56. Ra6 g4 57. Rxh6 Rg2 58. Rh5+
Ke4 59. f5 Rf2 60. Kc1 Kf3 61. Kd1 Kxg3 62. Ke1 Kg2 63. Rg5 g3 64. Rh5 Rf4 65.
Ke2 Re4+ 66. Kd3 Kf3 67. Rh1 g2 68. Rh3+ Kg4 69. Rh8 Rf4 70. Ke2 Rxf5 {. After
the first six games the champion's enormous match experience enabled him to
work out a method of playing for a win: essentially Karpov simply waited for
my next 'gift' and provoked me into mistakes, by creating positions in which
my impulsiveness and unpreparedness for play at the highest level would
increase their probability.} 0-1

[Event "95: World Championship Match, Moscow"]
[Site "?"]
[Date "1984.09.28"]
[Round "7"]
[White "Karpov, A."]
[Black "Kasparov, G."]
[Result "1-0"]
[ECO "D34"]
[Annotator "Garry Kasparov"]
[PlyCount "83"]
[EventDate "1984.??.??"]
[Source "Everyman Chess"]
[SourceDate "2012.11.28"]

{In the 7th game the champion 'served from the other side' - he played 1 d4.
There was no great surprise in this, but when you are in disarray you act
over-sensitively to any innovation by the opponent. I wasted time hesitating,
despite the decision taken beforehand to play the Tarrasch Defence. The
consequence of my uncertainty became severe time-trouble...} 1. d4 d5 2. c4 e6
3. Nf3 c5 4. cxd5 exd5 5. g3 Nf6 6. Bg2 Be7 7. O-O O-O 8. Nc3 Nc6 9. Bg5 cxd4
10. Nxd4 h6 11. Be3 Re8 12. Qb3 Na5 13. Qc2 Bg4 14. Nf5 Rc8 15. Nxe7+ Rxe7 16.
Rad1 Qe8 17. h3 Bh5 18. Bxd5 Bg6 19. Qc1 Nxd5 20. Rxd5 Nc4 21. Bd4 Rec7 22. b3
Nb6 23. Re5 Qd7 24. Qe3 f6 25. Rc5 Rxc5 26. Bxc5 Qxh3 27. Rd1 h5 28. Rd4 Nd7
29. Bd6 Bf7 30. Nd5 Bxd5 31. Rxd5 a6 32. Bf4 Nf8 33. Qd3 Qg4 34. f3 Qg6 35. Kf2
Rc2 $2 {A terrible time-trouble lapse in a practically equal position: I made
the second move of a variation, having mentally already exchanged the queens!}
({The obvious} 35... Qxd3 36. Rxd3 Rc2 $1 37. a4 g5 38. Bd2 Kf7 39. Bb4 Ne6 40.
Rd7+ Kg6 {would have given an easy draw. --- 'As he was making the move 35...Rc2, Garry winced when he suddenly saw the white queen on the board. Without
taking his hand off the rook, he tried in vain to find another, more
appropriate square. But, on failing to find one, he let go of the "upstart",
and violently bashed the clock button.' (Nikitin)}) 36. Qe3 $1 Rc8 37. Qe7 b5
$2 ({I was already thoroughly dispirited, and with my flag hanging I was
unable to find} 37... Qf7 38. Qxf7+ Kxf7 39. Rxh5 g5 40. Bd6 {(Averbakh)} Ne6
$1 {with good saving chances thanks to the active rook:} 41. Rh7+ Ng7 42. g4
Rc6 43. Bb4 Rc2 {etc.}) 38. Rd8 Rxd8 39. Qxd8 Qf7 40. Bd6 g5 41. Qa8 Kg7 42.
Qxa6 {. This last move was sealed. Without resuming the game, Black resigned.
--- The three defeats at the start of the match killed my fighting spirit, and
I needed time to think about what had happened and regain my composure, even
if only a little...} 1-0

[Event "96: World Championship Match, Moscow"]
[Site "?"]
[Date "1984.10.05"]
[Round "9"]
[White "Karpov, A."]
[Black "Kasparov, G."]
[Result "1-0"]
[ECO "D34"]
[Annotator "Garry Kasparov"]
[PlyCount "139"]
[EventDate "1984.??.??"]
[Source "Everyman Chess"]
[SourceDate "2012.11.28"]

{In the 9th game after some hesitation I decided to employ the Tarrasch
Defence again, since the opening outcome of the 7th game had been quite
acceptable for Black. But Karpov was excellently prepared and he was able to
emerge from the opening with a slight advantage. The game was adjourned in an
almost equal endgame, but with my sealed move I made the defence more
difficult, and soon after the resumption I made a serious mistake.} 1. d4 d5 2.
c4 e6 3. Nf3 c5 4. cxd5 exd5 5. g3 Nf6 6. Bg2 Be7 7. O-O O-O 8. Nc3 Nc6 9. Bg5
cxd4 10. Nxd4 h6 11. Be3 Re8 12. Qb3 Na5 13. Qc2 Bg4 14. Nf5 Rc8 15. Bd4 Bc5
16. Bxc5 Rxc5 17. Ne3 Be6 18. Rad1 Qc8 19. Qa4 Rd8 20. Rd3 a6 21. Rfd1 Nc4 22.
Nxc4 Rxc4 23. Qa5 Rc5 24. Qb6 Rd7 25. Rd4 Qc7 26. Qxc7 Rdxc7 27. h3 h5 28. a3
g6 29. e3 Kg7 30. Kh2 Rc4 31. Bf3 b5 32. Kg2 R7c5 33. Rxc4 Rxc4 34. Rd4 Kf8 35.
Be2 Rxd4 36. exd4 Ke7 37. Na2 Bc8 38. Nb4 Kd6 39. f3 Ng8 40. h4 Nh6 41. Kf2 Nf5
42. Nc2 f6 43. Bd3 g5 44. Bxf5 Bxf5 45. Ne3 Bb1 46. b4 {All the attention of
the two sides is focused on the kingside - the only part of the board where
the white king may be able to break through. Is Black able to prevent this?}
gxh4 $2 ({In expectation of the automatic reply} 46... gxh4 47. gxh4 {(the
basis of our analysis), after which White cannot break through:} Bg6 48. Kg3
Ke6 49. Ng2 Kd6 50. Nf4 Bf7 51. Nd3 Be6 52. Nc5 Bc8 {with a draw.}) ({In view
of Black's subsequent problems, other ways of defending should have been
sought - for example,} 46... Ke6 $1 {. This was deemed to be the most accurate
reply:} 47. -- ({, now} 47. hxg5 fxg5 48. f4 {fails to} g4 {with a draw.}) ({
. But there are also other tries:} 47. g4 hxg4 48. hxg5 ({to Dvoretsky's
recommendation} 48. Nxg4 gxh4 49. Kg2 {there is the satisfactory reply} Bf5 50.
Ne3 Bg6 51. Kh3 Bh5 52. f4 Be2 53. Kxh4 Bf3) 48... gxf3 $1 49. gxf6 (49. Kxf3
fxg5 50. Kg4 Kf6 51. Nxd5+ Kg6 {with a draw - Nunn}) 49... Be4 $1 50. Ng4 Kf7
51. Kg3 Ke6 52. Ne5 ({or} 52. Kf4 Kf7 53. Ke5 Bg6 $1 54. Kxd5 Bh5 55. Nf2 Kxf6
{with a draw (Dvoretsky)}) 52... Kxf6 {and Black loses his a6-pawn, but gains
a draw with the help of zugzwang.}) (47. Kg2 Bd3 48. g4 hxg4 ({the waiting move
} 48... Bg6 {will also do}) 49. fxg4 Be4+ 50. Kg3 Kf7 $1 ({but not} 50... gxh4+
$2 51. Kxh4) 51. h5 Ke6 $1 52. Nd1 Bh7 53. Nc3 Bc2 54. Kf3 Kd6 55. Ke3 Ke6 56.
Kd2 Bh7 {, when the white king cannot break through, and on its own the knight
cannot win the game:} 57. a4 bxa4 58. Nxa4 f5 {etc. Thus 46...Ke6 would have
given Black a simpler draw.})) 47. Ng2 $3 {(14) This unexpected and brilliant
move, which we overlooked in our home analysis, left me in a state of shock
and my resistance almost collapsed. I intuitively sensed that now Black's
position was hopeless...} hxg3+ {(14)} 48. Kxg3 {White quickly picks up the
h5-pawn and breaks through with his king.} Ke6 ({As was shown by Marin, it was
no better to play} 48... Bg6 49. Nf4 Bf7 50. Kh4 Ke7 51. Nxh5 Ke6 (51... Bxh5
52. Kxh5 {and wins}) 52. Ng7+ Ke7 53. Kg4 {, when after} Kd6 ({while} 53... Bg6
54. Nh5 Bc2 55. Nf4 Kd6 56. Kh5 Bd1 57. Kg6 Ke7 $1 {leads to a position from
the game (where} 58. Nh5 $1 {etc. is decisive)}) 54. Nh5 {Black loses his
f-pawn and with it the game.}) 49. Nf4+ Kf5 50. Nxh5 Ke6 {(forced, in view of
the threat of Ng7-e8-c7)} 51. Nf4+ Kd6 52. Kg4 Bc2 53. Kh5 Bd1 54. Kg6 Ke7 $1 (
{Of course, not} 54... Bxf3 $2 55. Kxf6 {, winning the d5-pawn and the game.})
55. Nxd5+ $2 {A blunder: the d5-pawn was merely hindering Black!} (55. Nh5 $1 {
, which the commentators also overlooked at the time, is far stronger.} -- ({
. Now} 55... Bc2+ {is insufficient:} 56. Kg7 Ke6 57. Nxf6 Bb1 (57... Kf5 58.
Nxd5 {- Dvoretsky}) 58. Ng4 Kf5 59. Kf7 Kf4 60. Ke6 Kxf3 61. Nf6 Ke3 62. Kxd5 {
and wins (Marin).}) ({. Black must play} 55... Bxf3 56. Nxf6 Be4+ $1 (56... Ke6
{is worse:} 57. Ne8 Kd7 58. Ng7 Ke7 59. Kf5 Kd6 60. Kf6 {and wins}) 57. Kg5 Bd3
$1 {, but a joint analysis by Marin and Dvoretsky (2005) demonstrates a pretty
win for White after} (57... Bg2 58. Kf5 {, driving back the king and winning
the d5-pawn}) 58. Ng4 $1 Bf1 $1 59. Ne5 Bh3 60. Kg6 $1 Ke6 61. Nc6 Kd6 62. Na5
Ke7 63. Nb3 Bd7 64. Nc5 Bc8 65. Kg7 $1 Bf5 66. Nxa6 Bd3 67. Nb8 Bc2 68. Nc6+ $1
Ke6 ({and if Black defends against the raid along the 8th rank -} 68... Kd7 69.
Ne5+ Ke7 {, White converts his extra pawn by} 70. Ng4 {and Ne3, and then 'he
cannot be prevented from bringing back his king and, after playing his knight
to c3 at a convenient moment, advancing a3-a4' (Dvoretsky)}) 69. Kf8 $1 Bg6 70.
Na7 Bd3 71. Ke8 Be2 72. Nc6 $1 Kd6 73. Ne7 $1 Ke6 74. Kd8 Kd6 (74... Bf1 75.
Nc6) 75. Nf5+ Ke6 76. Ne3 Kd6 77. Kc8 Kc6 78. Kb8 {, when the king breaks
through to the b5-pawn, after which a3-a4 proves decisive. --- But this was
established only twenty years after the match, under the watchful eye of a
computer...})) 55... Ke6 ({Immediately after the game I regretted that I had
not played} 55... Kd6 $5 {. Soviet commentators diplomatically remarked that
after} 56. Nxf6 ({and} 56. Nc3 Bxf3 57. Kxf6 Bg2 {(c6) would have reduced the
game to a drawn position discovered by the analysts}) 56... Bxf3 {'the win is
still not so simple', which translated into modern language means 'the
position is a dead draw':} 57. Kf5 Bg2 58. Kf4 Bh3 59. Ke3 Bf5 60. Ne4+ Kd5 61.
Nc5 Bc8 62. Kd3 Bf5+ {and ...Bc8.}) 56. Nc7+ Kd7 $2 {Submissively giving up a
second pawn. Alas, mentally I was already reconciled to defeat and I did not
suspect how difficult things were for White!} (56... Kd6 {was far stronger,
with the idea of} 57. Nxa6 ({or} 57. Ne8+ Ke7 ({but not} 57... Kd5 $2 58. f4 $1
) 58. Nxf6 Bxf3 59. Kf5 Kd6 60. Kf4 Bg2 61. Ke3 Bh3 {- with the same draw as
in the previous note}) 57... Bxf3 58. Kxf6 Kd5 {(Averbakh)} 59. Nc7+ Kxd4 60.
Nxb5+ Kc4 {with a draw. But the most surprising thing is that, as a deep
analysis shows, even though two pawns down Black is not lost!}) 57. Nxa6 Bxf3
58. Kxf6 Kd6 59. Kf5 Kd5 60. Kf4 Bh1 61. Ke3 Kc4 62. Nc5 $1 {(16)} Bc6 (62...
Bg2 {(Geller)} 63. Nd3 Bh1 {(b7) was also suitable.}) 63. Nd3 Bg2 ({'There was
the interesting idea} 63... Be8 64. Ne5+ Kd5 {with the hope of holding out two
pawns down.' (Averbakh)}) 64. Ne5+ {(13)} Kc3 (64... Kd5 $5 {(Averbakh) came
into consideration, for example:} 65. Nd7 ({or} 65. Ng4 Bh3 66. Nh6 Be6) 65...
Bh1 66. Kd3 Be4+ 67. Kc3 Bf3 68. a4 bxa4 69. Nb6+ Kc6 70. Nxa4 Bh5 {(g4), and
the two extra pawns do not bring success (as shown by the Tablebase).}) 65. Ng6
Kc4 66. Ne7 Bb7 $2 {(17) Only this is the decisive mistake: now Black loses
because of zugzwang.} ({During the game many observers suggested that} 66...
Bh1 $1 {would have been more tenacious, and here a win has still not yet been
found:} 67. -- (67. Nf5 Kd5 $1 68. Ng3 (68. Kf4 Be4 $1 {- Marin}) 68... Bg2 69.
Kd3 $5 {- to this move by Dvoretsky there is Müller's reply} Bf3 $5 70. Nf1
Be4+ 71. Kc3 Bf3 72. Ne3+ Ke4 73. Nc4 $1 Kd5 $1 74. Nb2 Kc6 75. a4 bxa4 76.
Nxa4 Bh5 {(g4), with the same draw as in the note to Black's 64th move}) (67.
Nc8 Kd5 68. Kd3 Be4+ 69. Kc3 Kc6 {(Timman), and my attempt} 70. Ne7+ Kd7 71.
Ng8 Ke6 72. Nh6 Bf3 73. Kd3 Bh1 74. Ng4 {was parried by Dvoretsky with} Bf3 $1
({with the idea of} 74... Bg2 $2 75. Nf2 $1 Bf3 ({or} 75... Bf1+ 76. Ke3 {and
Nd3-f4, winning}) 76. Ne4) 75. Ne3 ({or} 75. Nf2 Kd5) 75... Kd6 {.}) (67. d5 $2
Bxd5 {with a draw.})) 67. Nf5 Bg2 $6 ({'And again} 67... Kd5 {would have set
White more problems' (Averbakh). After} 68. Kd3 Ke6 $1 {to succeed White needs
to transfer his knight to c3, and this aim is achieved only by the paradoxical
move} 69. Ng7+ $3 {, found in 2005 by Müller (obviously at the board it would
have been very hard, if at all possible, to find such a move), for example:}
Kd6 ({or} 69... Kd7 70. Nh5 Bg2 (70... Kd6 71. Nf6 {and Ne4-c3}) 71. Nf4 $1
Bf1+ 72. Ke4 Kd6 73. Ke3 $1 Bc4 74. Ne2 Ke6 75. Nc3 {and wins}) 70. Ne8+ $1 Kd7
(70... Ke7 71. Nc7 Bc6 72. d5) 71. Nf6+ Ke6 72. Ne4 Bc6 73. Nc3 {.}) 68. Nd6+
Kb3 69. Nxb5 Ka4 70. Nd6 $1 ({After} 70. Nd6 Kxa3 71. b5 {the bishop has to be
given up for this pawn. --- Times: 3.25-3.55.}) (70. -- {Thus the score had
increased to 4-0 in Karpov's favour. For me it came as a great shock to lose
four games out of nine, without a single win (just imagine: during the two
preceding years I had only lost three games, and here I had already lost four!)
. I was two steps away from a humiliating rout. --- It only remained, so to
speak, for the champion to wrap up and dispatch his opponent, i.e. me. But
here Karpov violated an undisputable law of the struggle - the opponent must
be finished off. Having decided that I myself would ripen and drop off, like a
mature fruit, he relaxed the pressure. Intoxicated by success, Karpov set
himself a high objective: to win by a 6-0 whitewash and disable a dangerous
rival for a long time. This was no longer a contest only with me, but also
with the shadow of the legendary Bobby Fischer, who in his time won by the
same score (without any draws!) in his Candidates matches with Taimanov and
Larsen.}) (70. -- {The decision not to take risks played into my hands. To
last out for as long as possible, I needed to regain my composure and urgently
change tactics. From here on I began playing extremely cautiously,
endeavouring to exclude even the slightest risk. There followed a record
series of seventeen draws! This came to an end in the 27th game, in which I
lost a drawn endgame. The extreme tension of the two and half months' struggle
nevertheless made itself felt: I relaxed prematurely in a simple position,
which on another day I would have held without difficulty. --- The score
became 5-0 (with 22 draws) and I found myself right on the brink. Those were
difficult days! It seemed to be all over - but here the most interesting part
began. Unexpectedly, the 27th game became a turning-point, and not a 'killer'
as many imagined it would. Who could have thought that there were a further 21
games to come, and that Karpov would not gain another win?!}) 1-0

[Event "97: World Championship Match, Moscow"]
[Site "?"]
[Date "1984.12.07"]
[Round "31"]
[White "Karpov, A."]
[Black "Kasparov, G."]
[Result "1/2-1/2"]
[ECO "D58"]
[Annotator "Garry Kasparov"]
[PlyCount "70"]
[EventDate "1984.??.??"]
[Source "Everyman Chess"]
[SourceDate "2012.11.28"]

{The crunch was to come in the 31st game. All the indications were that it was
destined to be decisive. That was their plan. Karpov wore a new suit for the
occasion and he came on to the stage looking smart and fresh - he was
obviously aiming for a win. His entire entourage also turned out in their
Sunday best. From the very start of the game the press centre was full, many
TV cameras were in operation and in the auditorium there was a special tension
in the air - the expectation of something significant was felt. In a secluded
corner behind the stage a laurel wreath, prepared by the USSR Chess Federation,
was awaiting its owner. Everything was ready for the ceremony planned for that
evening. Only one thing remained - to win the game. --- And the first half of
it went well for Karpov. He gained an advantage and was even able to win a
pawn. But then something extraordinary happened: when the situation became
sharper, he simply panicked. Generally speaking, I was the one who should have
panicked, but in fact I was completely calm. To make sure I even took off my
jacket.} 1. Nf3 d5 2. d4 Nf6 3. c4 e6 4. Nc3 Be7 5. Bg5 h6 6. Bh4 O-O 7. e3 b6
8. Rc1 Bb7 9. Be2 Nbd7 10. cxd5 exd5 11. O-O c5 12. Qa4 a6 13. dxc5 bxc5 14.
Rfd1 Qb6 15. Qb3 Qa7 16. Bg3 Rad8 17. Ne1 d4 18. exd4 cxd4 19. Na4 Rc8 20. Rxc8
Rxc8 21. Bc4 Rf8 22. Qd3 $2 {The critical moment of the game.} ({Karpov
decides simply to capture the pawn, but the energetic} 22. Nf3 $1 {would have
set Black far more difficult problems:} Nc5 (22... Bxf3 23. Qxf3 {is also
depressing}) 23. Nxc5 Bxc5 24. Ne5 Ba8 25. f3 ({or} 25. Nd3 Ne4 26. Be5) 25...
Nh5 26. Bf2 Nf4 27. Rc1 {with unpleasant pressure, although it is rather early
to be talking about the inevitability of White winning.}) 22... Bc6 $1 {Thanks
to the poor position of the knight on a4 and his activity in the centre, Black
gains quite good compensation for the pawn.} ({'} 22... Nc5 23. Qxd4 Rd8 $2 {
did not work because of} 24. Qxd8+ $1 Bxd8 25. Rxd8+ Kh7 26. Bb8 $1 Qa8 27. Nb6
{, and the black queen cannot escape from the dungeon.' (Lilienthal)}) 23. Bb3
Ne4 {Here I gained something of a new lease of life and calmed down. I
remembered an old game with Alburt (Game No.28), where White was also a pawn
up, but everything was spoiled by his knight being stuck on a4 and hopelessly
inferior in strength to Black's bishop.} 24. Qxd4 Qb7 {This move was not
commented upon: Black is a pawn down, and it would seem that he should avoid
the exchange of queens, doing everything possible to sharpen the play.} ({But
here was a convenient opportunity to exploit the 'hanging' state of the white
pieces:} 24... Qxd4 $5 {(a computer recommendation)} 25. Rxd4 Re8 $5 {(an
ambush!) and ...Bf6, with activity giving a quite easy draw. --- However, at
that moment I sensed some uncertainty on the part of Karpov. Possibly he saw
that his advantage was extremely shaky, and less that it had seemed a few
moves earlier. The feeling that victory was slipping away upset his composure...}) 25. Bd5 {'A timely simplifying manoeuvre' (Averbakh). Was there a worthy
alternative?} ({There was no point in making an escape square for the king -} 
25. h3 {in view of} Nxg3 26. fxg3 Bxa4 27. Qxa4 Nc5 {and ...Nxb3.}) ({And after
} 25. Nc3 Ndc5 {Black has good play for the pawn:} 26. Bd5 ({or} 26. Bc2 Nxg3 (
26... Bf6 $5 27. Qc4 Re8) 27. hxg3 Qxb2 28. Nd5 Qb7 29. Nxe7+ Qxe7 {with
equality}) 26... Bf6 $1 27. Bxc6 (27. Qc4 Nxc3) 27... Qxb2 28. Qxe4 Nxe4 29.
Nxe4 Rd8 {, and after also capturing the a-pawn the black queen will be rather
stronger than the three minor pieces.}) 25... Ndf6 26. Bxc6 Qxc6 27. b3 {The
knight is defended, but it is still out of play.} Re8 (27... Rd8 $5 {was
perhaps more accurate, driving the queen into the corner -} 28. Qa1 {, and
only then} Re8 ({in addition,} 28... Rc8) ({or} 28... Nd2 {is interesting.}))
28. Qd3 $6 {For the second time in this game the queen ends up 'in the wrong
place at the wrong time' (Karpov must have rather unhappy memories of Qd3).
Now the position does indeed become sharp.} ({All the commentators recommended
} 28. Qc4 $1 {, which would still have left White as the stronger side:} -- (
28... Qb7 {- possibly this is what I would have played, continuing to maintain
the tension. But then Karpov could have created problems for Black with} 29.
Nf3 {, for example:} Rc8 30. Qd3 Qb5 31. Qb1 {, intending to question Black's
compensation for the pawn, although the position is still full of life}) (28...
Qxc4 29. bxc4 Rc8 {. Apparently it was this endgame that my opponent wanted to
avoid, as he was afraid of its drawing tendencies:} 30. Rd4 ({or} 30. Nb6 Rc5
$1 ({but not} 30... Rc6 31. Nd5 Kf8 32. Nxe7 Kxe7 33. Rc1 $1) 31. Nd3 Rc6 32.
Nd5 Nxd5 33. cxd5 Rc2 34. Re1 Nxg3 35. Rxe7 Rd2 36. hxg3 Rxd3 {, and in both
cases Black should be able to hold the position}) 30... Ng5 $1 31. Nb6 Rc6 32.
Nd5 Kf8 33. Nxe7 Kxe7 34. Nd3 Ne6 35. Rh4 g5 36. Rxh6 Rxc4 {.})) 28... h5 $1 {
Potential tension is created on the kingside, and after the probable exchange .
..Nxg3 and hxg3 the black knight can be established at g4. It was evident that
Karpov had become nervous. And while he was feverishly seeking a simple way of
solving the problems which had suddenly arisen (but there no longer was such a
way), I took off my jacket and with a confident air I began strolling around
the stage.} 29. Qc4 {Too late!} ({In the event of} 29. Nf3 Ng4 {Black also has
good counterplay - the white king is under the fire of his pieces, and the
knight on a4 is a long way away, for example:} 30. Ne5 Nxe5 31. Bxe5 Bh4 {with
clear compensation for the pawn (} 32. f4 Bf2+ 33. Kf1 Ba7 34. Nb2 Nf2 35. Qd7
Qa8 36. Rd2 Ng4 {).}) 29... Qb7 30. Nf3 Rc8 31. Qe2 Ng4 32. Ne5 Nxg3 33. hxg3
Qb5 $1 {(now Black has absolutely nothing to fear)} 34. Nc4 ({Or} 34. Qxb5 axb5
35. Nxg4 hxg4 36. Nb6 Rc2 {with equality.}) 34... Bf6 35. Nab6 Re8 {Here I
offered a draw, and Karpov, with just three minutes left for five moves,
accepted it with a strange sigh of relief.} ({In another situation I could
have played on - say, if} 35... Re8 36. Qf1 {, there is the unpleasant} (36.
Qd2 {is safer:} Be7 $1 37. Nd5 Bc5 38. Nde3 Nxe3 39. Nxe3 Bxe3 40. fxe3 Qg5 {
with equality}) 36... h4 {(although White is not in any great danger). ---
Times: 2.28-2.22. --- This draw was a great moral victory for me. It was not
just that the conclusion of the match, planned for that day, had been
frustrated; the main thing was that it marked a psychological turning-point. I
realised that if I were to continue solving difficult problems as I had in
this game, events in the match would take a different turn. After all,
Karpov's earlier wins had been gained largely thanks to the blunders which had
littered my play from the start. But as soon as I began resisting tenaciously,
seeking only the slightest of counter-chances, Karpov was unable to do
anything with me.}) 1/2-1/2

[Event "98: World Championship Match, Moscow"]
[Site "?"]
[Date "1984.12.12"]
[Round "32"]
[White "Kasparov, G."]
[Black "Karpov, A."]
[Result "1-0"]
[ECO "E12"]
[Annotator "Garry Kasparov"]
[PlyCount "81"]
[EventDate "1984.??.??"]
[Source "Everyman Chess"]
[SourceDate "2012.11.28"]

{The initiative had passed to me, and it was not surprising that I won the
next game. This was my first win in the 94 days of the match and my first ever
win against Karpov, beginning with our duel in a simultaneous display ten
years earlier (Game No.11).} 1. d4 Nf6 2. c4 e6 3. Nf3 b6 {If Karpov had been
in a peaceable mood that day and had been feeling a lack of strength, he would
probably have chosen a solid set-up in the classical Queen's Gambit.} 4. Nc3
Bb7 5. a3 d5 6. cxd5 Nxd5 7. Qc2 ({In the variation with} 7. e3 {(Game Nos. 43,
52, 85)} Nd7 {(10th game), we had not in fact found any promising ideas for
White, and so I made the other approved move.}) ({After} 7. Qc2 {,} -- ({,
Karpov thought for a long time. In the usual line -} 7... c5 8. e4 Nxc3 9. bxc3
{, where I had gained memorable wins over Murey and Gheorghiu (Game Nos. 73,
75), at that time White had reached an impasse because of} Nd7 10. Bd3 ({
Portisch's improvement} 10. Bf4 $1 {appeared later (cf. Game No.73, note to
Black's 9th move)}) 10... Qc7 $1 {(Kasparov-Sosonko, Lucerne Olympiad 1982).})
({. But I was intending} 7... c5 8. dxc5 $1 Bxc5 9. Bg5 {- my attention had
been attracted by the recent game Vyzhmanavin-Novikov (Tashkent 1984), where
after} Qc7 {a recommendation by Plaskett;} ({earlier White had been successful
against} 9... Be7) ({and} 9... f6) ({from 1985 the line} 9... Qc8 10. Rc1 {
came to the fore (here I also made my contribution:} h6 11. Bh4 a5 12. Na4 Nd7
13. e4 $1 {, Kasparov-van der Wiel, Amsterdam 1988)}) 10. Rc1 f6 11. Nxd5 Bxd5
12. e4 $1 {White seized the initiative.}) ({. We were also prepared for} 7...
Nxc3 8. -- ({, with the idea after} 8. bxc3 c5 9. e4 Nd7 {of nevertheless
obtaining the position which White has avoided.}) ({. After the planned} 8.
Qxc3 {Adorjan upheld} h6 $5 {, not allowing} 9. Bg5 ({and intending to meet} 9.
Bf4 {with} Bd6 {. At the time we did not take this 'loss of time' seriously,
but later it transpired that Adorjan was right! As often happens after
significant games in world championship matches, the 7 Qc2 variation again
came to the fore, and in the line 7...Nxc3 8 Qxc3 the main move became 8...h6.
--- Perhaps at the board Karpov remembered the game with 7...c5 8 dxc5! - at
any event, he tried to reach the desired position with the help of another,
rare move.})))) 7... Nd7 $6 {(34)} (7... Nd7 {an invitation to} 8. e4 Nxc3 9.
bxc3 c5 10. Bd3 Qc7 $1 {(cf. above). But here the situation is worse for Black
than after 7 e3 Nd7: the bishop at c1 is not shut in by the pawn on e3, and
White has an advantageous opportunity to avoid the usual plan.}) 8. Nxd5 $1 {
(17)} exd5 (8... Bxd5 $6 {is worse. Later for some reason Karpov played this
against Gelfand (Moscow 1992), and after} 9. e4 Bb7 10. Bb5 $1 c6 11. Bxc6 Rc8
12. d5 $1 {the outcome was dismal for Black. White's position appealed to me
even a tempo down: in the 3rd game of my match with Korchnoi (London 1983) I
chose the rare variation 7 Qa4+ Nd7 8 Nxd5, planning after 8...Bxd5 (Korchnoi
replied 8...exd5) the queen retreat 9 Qc2!? with the idea of 9...c5 10 e4.
True, here after 10...Bb7 11 Be3 cxd4 Nxd4 a6 or 11 Bf4 cxd4 12 Rd1 Qc8 
(Azmaiparashvili-Ponomariov, Cap d'Agde (rapid) 2003) Black is alright.}) 9.
Bg5 $1 {This sortie causes Black definite discomfort, forcing him to make a
difficult choice.} f6 $6 {A weakening, which objectively deserves to be
criticised;} ({as does} 9... Be7 $6 10. Bxe7 Kxe7) ({or} 9... Nf6 $6 10. Bxf6
gxf6 {.}) ({But at the board it was not easy to realise that the best defence
was the ugly move} 9... Qc8 {. After the obvious} 10. g3 Bd6 11. Bh3 {there is
an unpleasant pin on the knight at d7, for example:} O-O 12. Bf4 $5 ({the
simple} 12. Qf5 Nb8 13. Qxc8 {is also possible, but this is probably
insufficient}) 12... Bxf4 13. gxf4 {(threatening Ne5)} Qd8 14. Rg1 {with the
initiative. --- Here Black has to defend, whereas Karpov wanted active
counterplay. From this point of view, 9...f6 looks better, since it enables
Black to gain time. But its drawbacks proved to be more significant...}) 10.
Bf4 c5 11. g3 $1 {Karpov obviously did not like this move.} ({Apparently he
was hoping for the routine} 11. e3 {, when after} c4 ({or} 11... Rc8 12. Qa4 c4
{he could have created counterplay. Now, however, the threat of Bh3 reminds
Black of the weakness of the light squares in his position.})) 11... g6 {A
symmetrical reply with the idea of 12 Bh3 f5 and ...Bg7. But the g6-pawn is a
new target for the development of White's initiative. However, it is hard to
offer Black good advice.} (11... g5 12. Be3) ({or} 11... Rc8 12. Bh3 cxd4 13.
Qd1 {is unattractive.}) (11... Qe7 {is more resourceful, with the idea of} 12.
Bh3 ({but} 12. h4 $1 {retains a clear advantage:} Qe4 13. Qd2 $1 cxd4 14. Bg2)
12... g5 13. Be3 Qe4 $1 {forcing the exchange of queens.}) ({It would appear
that} 11... Be7 12. Bh3 Kf7 13. O-O Nf8 {is more tenacious, but then White has
the unpleasant} 14. dxc5 $1 bxc5 15. b4 {.}) 12. h4 $1 {Such moves always gave
me great pleasure. White immediately attacks the vulnerable points in the
opponent's position.} Qe7 ({Possibly Karpov considered this defence adequate,
since now nothing is given by} 12... Qe7 13. h5 {because of} g5 14. Be3 Qe4 {.}
) 13. Bg2 {Opposing the advance of the black queen to e4.} Bg7 14. h5 {
'Black's position has the drawback that it is hard for him to find an
appropriate place for his king. In addition the d5- and g6-pawns can become a
convenient target for the white pieces.' (Vasyukov)} f5 $6 ({Karpov did not
play ...g7-g6 and ...Bg7 in order to make the ugly move} 14... g5 {, creating
a 'hole' on f5. But that would have been the lesser evil!} 15. -- ({. If} 15.
h6 {it is dangerous to reply} gxf4 $6 ({after} 15... Bf8 16. Be3 Qe6 {he is
quite capable of defending}) 16. hxg7 Qxg7 17. Nh4 $1 {with a powerful attack 
(pointed out at the time by the match commentators), for example:} fxg3 18. Nf5
gxf2+ 19. Kxf2 Qf8 20. b4 $1 c4 21. Qd2 {and Qf4 - despite his two extra pawns,
Black is completely helpless.}) ({. Perhaps Karpov did not like} 15. Be3 Rc8
16. Qf5 {, but after} h6 ({or} 16... Qe4 {it is not so clear just how
catastrophic is the weakness of the f5-square and the light squares in Black's
position in general, and there is still all to play for. The move 14...f5 is
logical in its own way, and it appears that Black has real chances of avoiding
the worst. White cannot keep his king at e1 for ever! And when he castles,
Black too will be able to castle without risk. However, things do not come to
this...}))) 15. Qd2 Bf6 {(13) Again Karpov had a difficult choice.} ({He
would have liked to play} 15... Nf6 16. h6 Bf8 {with the idea of} 17. Bg5 $6 ({
but White has the stronger} 17. Ng5 Ne4 18. Bxe4 $1 fxe4 19. Be5 Rg8 20. Qf4 {
(Averbakh)}) ({or} 17. dxc5 bxc5 18. O-O Ne4 19. Qa5 {, and in both cases
Black has problems with his king}) 17... Ne4 $1 {(Vasyukov).}) ({The attempt
to block the position by} 15... c4 {runs into} 16. Rc1 $1 {(with the threat of
Rc3-e3)} Nf6 17. h6 Bf8 18. Ne5 $1 {, and if} Ne4 {White advantageously replies
} 19. Bxe4 $1 fxe4 20. f3 {. --- After these continuations it would possibly
have been more difficult for White to increase his advantage. 15...Bf6,
covering the weak dark squares, looks sensible and solid, but on f6 the bishop
takes this square away from the knight, which can no longer go to e4! Karpov
clearly underestimated White's following response.}) 16. Rc1 $1 {With the
unusual threat of Rc3-e3. What can Black do with his king? With the white rook
on h1, he really doesn't want to castle kingside...} Rc8 17. Rc3 Rc6 {The only
defence is a mirror manoeuvre!} 18. Re3 {(14)} ({The computer chooses} 18. Kf1
$5) ({but many commentators pointed out the 'exceptional strength' of the move
} 18. Bg5 {, disclosing the weakness now of the dark squares in the opponent's
position:} O-O (18... cxd4 $2 19. Rxc6 Bxc6 20. hxg6) ({or} 18... Rg8 19. hxg6
hxg6 20. Re3 Re6 21. Bxf6 Nxf6 22. Rxe6 Qxe6 23. Qf4 {'and the white queen is
ready for a decisive invasion' (Dorfman)}) 19. hxg6 hxg6 20. Bxf6 Rcxf6 (20...
Nxf6 21. Ne5) 21. Ng5 {with an irresistible attack. --- But the rook move
should hardly be criticised, since it leads almost by force to a won ending
for White.}) 18... Re6 {I think that this is a unique instance, where in one
game three successive symmetrical moves were made: Rc1 - Rc8, Rc3 - Rc6, and
Re3 - Re6.} 19. Rxe6 Qxe6 20. Ng5 Qe7 ({The exchange} 20... Bxg5 21. Bxg5 {
would have led to a catastrophic weakening of the dark squares. But as it is,
Black's defences are about to crack - it only remains for White to find a
decisive strengthening of his position.}) 21. dxc5 $1 ({I was afraid of
squandering my advantage in the endgame after} 21. hxg6 $2 hxg6 22. Rxh8+ Bxh8
23. dxc5 Qxc5 ({if} 23... Bf6 $2 {a little combination is decisive:} 24. Bxd5
$1 Bxd5 25. Qxd5 Bxg5 26. c6) 24. Ne6 Qa5 25. Nc7+ ({little is also achieved
with} 25. Qxa5 bxa5 26. Bc1 Nf6) 25... Kd8 26. Qxa5 bxa5 27. Nxd5 {, and at
the board} Bxb2 {(?) seemed unclear to me;} ({but my intuition did not betray
me - the accurate} 27... Nb6 $1 {would have given a draw:} 28. Bc7+ (28. Bg5+
Ke8 29. Nc7+ Kd7 30. Bxb7 Kxc7 31. Ba6 Bxb2) ({or} 28. Nxb6 Bxg2 29. Nc4 Bd5 $1
{etc.}) 28... Kd7 29. Bxb6 Bxd5 30. Bxd5 axb6) {although after} 28. Bg5+ Kc8
29. Ne7+ Kc7 30. Bxb7 (30. Bf4+) 30... Kxb7 31. Nxg6 Bxa3 32. Nh4 a4 33. Kd1 {
White has a won position: the a-pawn does not promote. --- 21 dxc5 is clearly
stronger. It is another matter that it gave Black an opportunity for a
tactical counter-stroke, which unsettled me.}) 21... Nxc5 ({Here after} 21...
Qxc5 $6 22. Ne6 Qa5 23. b4 $1 Qxa3 24. O-O Qb2 (24... Qc3 25. Qa2 $1) 25. Nc7+
Ke7 ({or} 25... Kd8 26. Qe3 {White would have won}) 26. Nxd5+ {.}) (21... h6
22. Nf3 g5 23. Bd6 {was also bad for Black.}) 22. hxg6 d4 {The only practical
chance - 'a resourceful attempt to change the unfavourable development of
events' (Averbakh).} (22... hxg6 {is bad:} 23. Rxh8+ Bxh8 24. Bxd5 Bxd5 25.
Qxd5 {, and} Bxb2 {is not possible because of} 26. Qc6+ {.}) 23. g7 $2 {(10) 
Confusion.} ({White could have increased his advantage by the simple moves} 23.
Bxb7 Qxb7 24. f3 hxg6 25. Rxh8+ Bxh8 26. b4 Nd7 27. Qa2 Nf8 28. Ne6 $1 {
(Dorfman) - after} Qd7 29. Nc7+ Kd8 30. Qg8 Bg7 31. Nb5 $1 Qxb5 (31... d3 32.
Bc7+ Kc8 33. Qc4 d2+ 34. Kd1 Qe6 35. Qc2 {he would have obtained a technically
won endgame}) 32. Qxg7 Nd7 33. Qxd4 {.}) ({Another tempting possibility began
with the showy} 23. Nf7 $5 Bxg2 24. Rh2 {and it would have also led to the
goal:} hxg6 ({or} 24... Rf8 25. Rxh7 Qe6 26. Nd6+ Kd8 27. Nb5 $1 Be5 28. Bxe5
Qxe5 29. Nxd4 (29. Qxd4+ {is also good enough}) 29... Kc8 30. b4 Rd8 31. g7 $1
Bd5 32. Qc3 Bg8 33. Rh4 {, regaining the piece and winning. Alas, at that
moment I became excited, I was unable to calculate the variations accurately,
and I decided at least to retain a positional advantage, for which by 32 g7 I
broke up Black's pawn chain}) 25. Nxh8 g5 26. Ng6 Qe4 27. Be5 Kf7 28. Nh8+ $1 {
.}) 23... Bxg7 (23... Qxg7 $5 {.}) 24. Bxb7 Qxb7 25. f3 (25. O-O $5 {would
also have retained a small plus. My error on the 23rd move sharply changed the
character of the position, and effectively I had to begin all over again. In
the new phase of the game Black's pieces are active, but his pawns are weak.
And I judged that psychologically this would be unpleasant for Karpov.}) 25...
Qd5 $1 {(10) An excellent, dynamic move: not wishing to go totally on to the
defensive, Black sacrifices a pawn - his pieces occupy splendid positions!} ({
In the event of} 25... h6 26. Nh3 {and Nf2 White could have set about
processing the opponent's pawn weaknesses, and with quite good chances of
success.}) 26. Rxh7 {(11)} ({If} 26. b4) ({or} 26. Kf2 {Black, of course,
would have replied} h6 $1 {.}) 26... Rxh7 27. Nxh7 Qb3 $2 {'A mistake in
time-trouble.} ({As many commentators pointed out, after} 27... d3 $1 {White
could hardly have hoped to win' (Averbakh). And indeed, this would have led to
simplification and a draw:} 28. b4 Qb3 $1 {the simplest;} (28... Ne6 29. Be3 $1
{would still have left White some chances}) 29. Qe3+ Ne6 30. Qxd3 Qxd3 31. exd3
Nxf4 32. gxf4 b5 $1 {, and Black picks up the a3-pawn, while the knight on h7
makes a pitiful impression.}) 28. Bd6 $1 {Karpov made his previous move
confidently, and it was clear to me that he had missed my reply. It
unexpectedly transpires that White can launch an attack - 29 Qg5 is threatened.
} Ne6 {Now the game transposes into a queen ending.} ({In the event of} 28...
Kd7 29. Bxc5 bxc5 30. Qf4 Qe6 31. Ng5 {White is a pawn up with winning chances.
}) ({But} 28... d3 {would now have lost to} 29. Bxc5 bxc5 30. Qe3+ Kf7 (30...
Kd7 31. Qxc5) 31. Ng5+ Kg6 32. Ne6 $1 ({not} 32. Nh3 $6 Bxb2) 32... d2+ (32...
Bh6 33. f4) 33. Kxd2 Qxe3+ ({or} 33... Qxb2+ 34. Ke1 Qc3+ 35. Kf2 Qxe3+ 36.
Kxe3 Be5 37. Nxc5 Bxg3 38. Kd4 {etc.}) 34. Kxe3 Bxb2 35. a4 {.}) 29. Ng5 Bh6
30. Bf4 Bxg5 31. Bxg5 Nxg5 32. Qxg5 Qxb2 33. Qxf5 Qc1+ $6 {For eight moves
Karpov now had less than five minutes (against ten for me), and this
aggravated his problems. In severe time-trouble he reckoned that with checks
he would drive the white king away from the e2-pawn and then, after capturing
on a3, simply restore material equality. But this plan proved to have a flaw...
} ({The immediate} 33... Qxa3 {was stronger - after} 34. Qe4+ Kf7 35. Qxd4 {
Black's defence is difficult, but he can possibly hold on: after} Qc1+ 36. Kf2
Qc6 {he only needs to push his lone a-pawn, whereas White has to advance two
pawns (exposing his king in the process). For example:} 37. f4 a5 38. g4 ({in
the event of} 38. e4 a4 {-} 39. Kf3) 38... a4 {(threatening ...Qc5 with the
exchange of queens)} 39. Kg3 a3 40. g5 a2 41. f5 Qc5 42. g6+ Kg8 {with
equality. Most probably after 33...Qxa3 the game would have ended in a draw.})
34. Kf2 Qe3+ 35. Kf1 Qc1+ 36. Kg2 Qxa3 37. Qh5+ $1 ({Not} 37. Qe4+ $6 Qe7 {
with equality. Karpov missed this cunning 'side' check when he played 33...
Qc1+. Black nevertheless remains a pawn down, and in a worse situation.}) 37...
Kd7 {It is not easy to decide where to place the king, especially with your
flag hanging in the 32nd game!} ({Black would have had fewer saving chances if
he had kept his king in the vicinity of the enemy pawns:} 37... Kf8 $6 38. Qh8+
Kf7 39. Qxd4 a5 ({after} 39... Qa2 40. Kf2 Qe6 41. g4 a5 {, in contrast to the
33...Qxa3 variation, Black's queen is still on e6, and he has to lose a tempo
on ...Qc6, which changes the evaluation in White's favour}) 40. Qxb6 Qb4 ({or} 
40... a4 41. g4 Qe7 42. Kf2 a3 43. g5 $1 {and wins}) 41. Qc7+ Ke6 42. Qc6+ Ke7
43. g4 a4 44. g5 {.}) 38. Qg4+ Kc6 (38... Kc7 $5 {.}) 39. Qxd4 (39. Qe4+ Kc7 (
39... Kb5 {, the move previously suggested by me, is bad because of} 40. g4 Qc5
41. f4) 40. Qxd4 a5 $1 41. g4 Qd6 $1 42. Qg7+ Qd7 {would have come to roughly
the same thing.}) 39... b5 $6 (39... a5 $1 {was more accurate:} 40. g4 Qc5 41.
Qf6+ (41. Qa4+ Kd6 42. Qe8 Qg5) 41... Qd6 42. Qf5 Qd5 {, basing the defence on
the fact that White is not satisfied with the transition into a queen endgame.}
) 40. g4 b4 ({With his last move before the time control Black loses a real
hope of saving the game, which would still have remained after} 40... Qe7 $1 {
. --- It would not have been easy for me to find the correct reply. In such
cases the hand itself is drawn to the e2-pawn: since e2-e4 was not played on
the 1st move, why not seal e2-e4 on the 41st move?! But after} 41. e4 a5 42.
Qd5+ Kb6 43. f4 {the three connected passed pawns might not have won against
the two, seeing as White has exposed his king. Better chances of a distant win
are offered by 41 Kf2!, in order then to advance not the e-pawn, but the
g-pawn.}) 41. g5 {The sealed move.} ({In our home analysis we initially planned
} 41. g5 b3 42. -- (42. Qe4+ $1 Kd6 43. Qe8 $6 {, overlooking} ({therefore} 43.
Qg6+ $1 Ke7 44. Qf6+ Kd7 45. Qf5+ Ke7 46. g6 Qb2 47. Qf7+ Kd6 48. Qf4+ {is
correct, when Black is unable to save the game}) 43... Qa2 $1 {, which after}
44. g6 b2 45. g7 b1=Q 46. g8=Q Qxg8+ 47. Qxg8 {leads to a position with two
pawns against one, but the black king stands opposite the white pawns,
creating serious problems for White in the conversion of his advantage.}) (42.
g6 b2 43. g7 Qa2 44. Qe4+ Kc5 45. Qe7+ Kb6 46. Qd8+ Kb7 47. g8=Q Qxg8+ 48. Qxg8
b1=Q 49. Qd5+ {. is not so clear. In this endgame with two against one,
considerable resourcefulness would have been demanded of White. It is easier
for Black to play: he gives checks and advances his a-pawn, hoping in the
event of the exchange of the newly-created queens for an ending now with a
lone white pawn. Here the play could have continued for a long time, and the
game would probably have been adjourned for a second time. --- By the laws of
match play Karpov was obliged to resume the game, but apparently he did not
want to waste the remnants of his strength, or to resign in public. And the
following day he took what in my opinion was an incorrect decision, testifying
to his psychological weakness at that moment: he resigned the game without
resuming. --- Times: 2.34-2.29.})) (41. -- {5-1! We were jubilant: by scoring
a consolation goal, I had avoided a complete rout! The situation in the match
changed radically: the loss in the 32nd game dispelled Karpov's dreams of
repeating Fischer's feats, and now there was no longer any point in the
champion avoiding risks. But he was unable to retune to playing more freely
and riskily. Karpov needed a deep readjustment, but for this he no longer had
the mental strength. He continued waiting for a 'gift', but by that time I had
managed to perfect sound opening variations, and the blunders which plagued me
at the start of the match had practically disappeared. --- Eight draws
followed. If after the 9th game someone had said to Karpov, that even after
the New Year he would still be defending his title, sitting at the same table,
that person would certainly have been labelled a madman!}) 1-0

[Event "99: World Championship Match, Moscow"]
[Site "?"]
[Date "1985.01.14"]
[Round "41"]
[White "Karpov, A."]
[Black "Kasparov, G."]
[Result "1/2-1/2"]
[ECO "C42"]
[Annotator "Garry Kasparov"]
[PlyCount "141"]
[EventDate "1984.??.??"]
[Source "Everyman Chess"]
[SourceDate "2012.11.28"]

{A critical game for the entire match was the 41st, in which against 1 e4 I
took the risk of employing one of my opponent's weapons - the Petroff Defence.
The opening experiment concluded in a perfectly good endgame for me, in which
I could have drawn without any particular trouble. But here I again committed
a 'fatal mistake' (the only one between the 28th and 48th games!), and Karpov
could have concluded the match, had he not missed a winning move.} 1. e4 e5 2.
Nf3 Nf6 3. Nxe5 d6 4. Nf3 Nxe4 5. d4 d5 6. Bd3 Be7 7. O-O Nc6 8. c4 Nb4 9. Be2
dxc4 10. Bxc4 O-O 11. Nc3 Nd6 12. Bb3 Bf6 13. h3 Bf5 14. Be3 Re8 15. a3 Nd3 16.
Rb1 c5 17. dxc5 Ne4 18. Bc2 Nxb2 19. Qxd8 Raxd8 20. Rxb2 Bxc3 21. Rxb7 Nxc5 22.
Bxc5 Bxc2 23. Rxa7 Bd1 24. Re7 Rxe7 25. Bxe7 Rd3 26. Ng5 Bb2 27. Bb4 h6 28. Ne4
f5 29. Nc5 Rd5 30. Re1 f4 31. a4 Rd4 32. a5 Rxb4 33. Rxd1 $2 {An historic
mistake! After spending half of his 16-minute reserve of time, Karpov missed
an unexpected chance to win the game and the match.} ({While he was
considering his move, in the press centre Dorfman drew attention to the pretty
intermediate move} 33. a6 $1 {. An express analysis gave the following results:
} -- (33... Ba4 34. a7 Bc6 35. Re6 Bd5 36. Rd6) (33... Bb3 34. Nxb3 Ra4 (34...
Rxb3 35. a7) 35. Nc5 Ra5 36. Re4 $1 Kf7 (36... Rxc5 37. a7) 37. Rxf4+ Bf6 38.
Ra4 Rxa4 39. Nxa4 Bd4 40. Nc3 $1) (33... Rb8 34. Rxd1 Ba3 35. Nb7 $1 {, and in
all variations White wins. --- Why, after thinking over his 33rd move for
eight minutes, did Karpov not play this? In an interview after the match he
explained: 'Being in time-trouble, I was unable to calculate fully the
consequences of the piece sacrifice (33 a6!).' Possibly he decided 33 Rxd1 was
also winning, but...}) (33... Rd4 34. Re8+ {and 35 a7.})) 33... Bd4 {'Now the
struggle flares up with renewed strength.' (Taimanov)} 34. Ne6 Ba7 35. Rd7 ({
As the commentators remarked,} 35. Nxg7 Rb2 36. Nf5 Bxf2+ 37. Kf1 {came into
consideration. In my opinion, this was somewhat stronger: here it is more
difficult for Black to gain a draw - he has more opportunities to go wrong.
True, after} h5 {and ...Ra2 (and if} 38. Ra1 {, then} Ba7 {) he should
nevertheless be able to hold the position.}) 35... Rb1+ 36. Kh2 Bxf2 37. Nxf4
Ra1 38. Ne6 Rxa5 ({'Black's task is simpler after} 38... g5 $1 39. Rg7+ (39.
Rd5 Be1) 39... Kh8 40. Rg6 Kh7 41. Nf8+ Kh8 42. a6 ({or} 42. Rxh6+ Kg7 43. Rg6+
Kxf8 44. Rf6+ Kg7 45. Rxf2 Rxa5) 42... Bg1+ $1 43. Kg3 Ra3+ 44. Kg4 Ra4+ $1 {
with an inevitable draw.' (Dorfman) --- I saw this idea, but in severe
time-trouble I did not calculate as far as all the checks, beginning with 42...
Bg1+!. Besides, after capturing the a5-pawn I assumed that the resulting
ending with two pawns against one on the same wing was objectively drawn.}) 39.
Rxg7+ Kh8 40. Rf7 Be3 41. Kg3 Bd2 {The sealed move. --- I didn't like Black's
position, but after lengthy home analysis my trainers and I found a clear way
to draw. On the day when the game was resumed, the Hall of Columns was packed
with Karpov's supporters, who were hoping to see his sixth win. But once again
they were to be disappointed... On the 71st move Karpov offered a draw. He
looked very tired and depressed.} 42. Rd7 Bc3 43. Kf3 Kg8 44. Nf4 Rf5 45. Ke4
Rf7 46. Rd8+ Kh7 47. Rd3 Re7+ 48. Kf3 Bb2 49. Rb3 Bc1 50. Nd5 Re5 51. Nf6+ Kg6
52. Ne4 Rf5+ 53. Ke2 Re5 54. Rb4 Re7 55. Rc4 Re8 56. g3 Bb2 57. Kf3 Re6 58. Rc5
Bd4 59. Rd5 Be5 60. Rb5 Bc7 61. Rc5 Bb6 62. Rc8 Bd4 63. Rg8+ Bg7 64. h4 Ra6 65.
Kf4 Ra5 66. Re8 Rf5+ 67. Ke3 Re5 68. Rg8 Re7 69. Kf4 Rf7+ 70. Kg4 h5+ 71. Kh3 {
. The outcome of this game had an enormous effect on the psychological state
of the two players. Karpov's belief in overall victory was obviously shaken,
although his choice of opening variations in games 43-47 indicates a desire to
increase the risk and seize his chance in double-edged play. He sensed that
his opponent had not simply seized the initiative, but was now not inferior to
him in technical positions - in that aspect of the game where until recently
Karpov had been sure of his superiority. Now he could not achieve the desired
result by using purely technical means alone. --- There followed a further six
draws, in which several times I had an advantage and excellent winning chances.
But I was successful only in the 47th game - 5-2! After this it was announced
that the match would move from the Hall of Columns to the Sport Hotel. And for
recuperation Karpov gained a whole week (two 'technical' time-outs on 1st and
4th February) - a luxury which was totally unavailable to me at the start of
the match, when I so needed a respite. Moreover, after this the champion also
took another time-out on his own account (6th February), and so the next game
took place only nine days later.} 1/2-1/2

[Event "100: World Championship Match, Moscow"]
[Site "?"]
[Date "1985.02.08"]
[Round "48"]
[White "Kasparov, G."]
[Black "Karpov, A."]
[Result "1-0"]
[ECO "C42"]
[Annotator "Garry Kasparov"]
[PlyCount "133"]
[EventDate "1984.??.??"]
[Source "Everyman Chess"]
[SourceDate "2012.11.28"]

{It was precisely during those days that FIDE and the Soviet Chess Federation
began actively seeking a pretext for terminating the match ahead of schedule,
and as a result the 48th game was destined to draw a line under our five-month
duel.} 1. e4 e5 2. Nf3 Nf6 ({On this occasion Karpov's objective was merely to
hold out (after all, it would be far more convenient to terminate the match
with a score of 5-2, rather than 5-3), and so he avoided} 2... Nc6 {(44th and
46th games) and chose one of the most solid openings.}) 3. Nxe5 d6 4. Nf3 Nxe4
5. d4 d5 6. Bd3 Nc6 7. O-O Be7 (7... Bg4 8. c4 $1 {- Game No.67 in 'Kasparov
vs. Karpov 1975-1985'; Game No.6 in 'Kasparov vs. Karpov 1986-87'.}) 8. c4 $1 (
{After the 41st game this eclipsed} 8. Re1 {(Game No.50).}) 8... Nf6 ({
Realising that in the event of} 8... Nb4 {I would use his own prescription
from the 41st game -} 9. Be2 $1 {(Game No.45 in 'Kasparov vs. Karpov
1975-1985'), Karpov made another, less critical move, which had been known
since the mid-19th century.}) 9. Nc3 ({At that time this line was not yet
deeply developed, and it was only on the threshold of the 21st century that
the immediate} 9. h3 {was deemed to be more accurate.}) 9... O-O (9... Be6 $5 {
is interesting:} 10. c5 (10. cxd5 Nxd5 {is equal, Karpov-Larsen, Bugojno 1980;
Milos-Karpov, Buenos Aires 2001}) 10... Bg4 $1 11. Bb5 O-O 12. Bxc6 bxc6 13. h3
Bxf3 14. Qxf3 Re8 {with good prospects of equalising (an example:
Shirov-Gelfand, Astana 2001).}) 10. h3 {'An important prophylactic move,
preventing the pin on the knight and setting Black a problem: how can he now
successfully complete his development?' (Taimanov)} dxc4 ({A new attempt to
develop the queen's bishop, avoiding the bind after} 10... Be6 11. c5 {.}) ({
But the usual continuation has remained more popular:} 10... Nb4 11. Be2 dxc4
12. Bxc4 c6 13. Re1 Nbd5 {- the main tabiya of the 8...Nf6 variation, where
White plays} 14. Bg5 ({or immediately} 14. Qb3 Nb6 15. Bd3 Be6 16. Qc2) 14...
Be6 15. Qb3 {. At any event, White remains the active side, and in
neutralising his initiative it is not easy for Black to avoid creating real
weaknesses in his position. It was perhaps for this reason that Karpov chose a
different, more dynamic way of developing, aimed at counterplay.}) 11. Bxc4 Na5
12. Bd3 Be6 {Black is planning either to carry out the freeing ...c7-c5, or to
occupy the d5-point (in this case his knight on a5 will return to c6).} 13. Re1
{'A flexible move.} ({After} 13. Be3 Nc4 14. Qc2 Nxe3 15. fxe3 {White has an
active position, but the two black bishops may become dangerous.' (Tal)}) 13...
Nc6 {The most natural reply - Karpov has also played this in the 21st Century.}
({If} 13... c5 {, then} 14. dxc5 ({but a pawn sacrifice is also interesting -} 
14. Ng5 $5 cxd4 15. Nxe6 fxe6 16. Ne4 {with quite good compensation}) 14...
Bxc5 15. Bg5 {seemed quite promising to me.}) 14. a3 {Preventing ...Nb4.} ({If
} 14. Bg5 h6 15. Bh4 Nd5 16. Bg3 Bd6 {with equality (Leitao-Karpov, Sao Paulo 
(rapid) 2004).}) 14... a6 ({If} 14... Qd7) ({or} 14... Re8 {the pin} 15. Bb5 {
is unpleasant}) ({while after} 14... Qd6 15. Be3 Nd5 16. Qc2 {(Gelfand-Adams,
Wijk aan Zee 1994), it is not easy for Black to blockade the d4-pawn
completely, and as long as it is potentially mobile, White retains the
initiative.}) 15. Bf4 $5 {(18) After some thought I found an interesting plan,
based on tactical nuances.} ({In my view,} 15. Bc2 {, which was tried many
years later in three games of the rapid match Shirov-Karpov (Bastia 2003), is
no better. The second of them went} Qd7 16. Qd3 Rfd8 17. Bg5 $2 ({it was
correct to play} 17. Be3 g6 {(threatening ...Bf5 with the exchange of bishops)}
18. Qd2 $5 Bf5 19. Bb3 {with a slight initiative}) 17... Nxd4 {(when Black
could have captured the pawn).}) 15... Qd7 ({'} 15... Nd5 {, aiming for
simplification, came into consideration' (Yusupov). However, 'after} 16. Bg3 {
Black would not have got out of his difficulties' (Taimanov):} -- ({, if} 16...
Bf6 {White has the promising} 17. Ne4 $1 Bxd4 18. Neg5 Bxb2 (18... Nf6 19. Rxe6
) 19. Rb1 {.}) ({, while the attempt to provoke further exchanges -} 16... Bd6
17. Bh4 Be7 {does not succeed because of} 18. Bxe7 Ncxe7 (18... Ndxe7 19. Rxe6
$1 fxe6 20. Ng5 {is dangerous for Black}) 19. Ng5 {with the unexpected win of
a pawn:} Bf5 20. Nxd5 Nxd5 21. Bxf5 Qxg5 22. Re5 $1 Qd8 23. Bxh7+ Kxh7 24. Qh5+
{. --- Therefore Karpov made a natural move, continuing his development. I
think that my reply greatly surprised him.})) 16. Ne5 $1 {Not an altogether
usual decision - after all, by exchanging all the knights it would appear that
White reduces the tension. On the other hand he gets rid of his isolated pawn
and thanks to the activity of his pieces he acquires new prospects.} Nxe5 (
16... Qxd4 $2 {is bad:} 17. Nxc6 Qxf4 18. Nxe7+ Kh8 {. It appears that the
knight at e7 is in danger, but after} 19. Bc2 c6 20. Qc1 {(the simplest) White
remains with a material advantage.}) 17. dxe5 Nd5 18. Nxd5 Bxd5 19. Qc2 {The
point of White's idea: he completes his development with gain of tempo,
provoking a weakening of the opponent's kingside. The character of the
position has unexpectedly changed. I think that this is what distinguishes the
game - the numerous positional metamorphoses. Both players constantly had to
weigh up the pluses and minuses of various different configurations.} g6 ({'If
} 19... h6 $6 {Kasparov could have played} 20. Rac1 $1 -- (20... c6 21. Re3 {
, when it is difficult for Black to defend his kingside.' (Yusupov).}) ({. Or} 
20... c5 21. Qe2 {, and it is not easy for Black to parry the threat of Bb1
and Qc2.} -- ({. It is dangerous to play} 21... Rfd8 22. Bb1 Bf8 23. Rc3 $1 {
etc.}) ({. Nevertheless, there is a defence:} 21... Qe6 22. Bb1 c4 23. Rcd1 (
23. Qc2 Qg6 $1) ({or} 23. Rc3 f5 $1 {is no better}) 23... Rad8 24. Be3 {(by
moving the bishop off an undefended square, White intensifies the threat of
Qc2)} Bc6 ({Black has to sacrifice a pawn - the exchange sacrifice} 24... Qc6
25. Qc2 g6 26. Bxh6 Bxg2 27. Bxf8 Rxf8 {gives White an advantage after} 28. Re3
) 25. Qc2 g6 26. Bxh6 Rxd1 27. Rxd1 Rd8 {. However, it is doubtful whether
Black had anything better than the endgame from the note to the next move. ---
I think that Karpov did not look for a variational refutation of 19...h6 - he
was sickened by the very thought that in this case White would be able to set
up the attacking queen and bishop battery on the b1-h7 diagonal. Making such a
dangerous move would be difficult not only in an important game from a match
for the world crown, and besides, after 19...g6 Black's defences look solid...
But now concrete tactical play begins.}))) 20. Rad1 c6 ({I was rather expecting
} 20... Qc6 21. Qxc6 {with somewhat the better ending for White -} bxc6 ({or} 
21... Bxc6 22. Bc4 $1 {(Taimanov)} Bc5 (22... Rad8 23. e6) 23. b4 $5 Bb6 24.
Bg5 {, when Black would have faced an unpleasant defence}) 22. Rd2 Rfd8 23. Rc1
{. --- Karpov made the strategically risky move 20...c6 without thinking,
having probably planned it beforehand. Of course, he saw White's following
reaction, but he reckoned that his position would be safe enough and not
without counter-chances. Karpov's play is logical in its way: as at the start
of the match, he does not want to reconcile himself to an unpromising endgame
and he chooses a continuation which, though risky, leaves Black possibilities
of counterplay. However, White's threats turned out to be more serious than my
opponent assumed.}) 21. Bh6 Rfd8 22. e6 fxe6 ({'} 22... Bxe6 23. Bxg6) ({or} 
22... Qe8 23. Qc3 f6 24. f4 $1 {was bad for Black.' (Averbakh)}) 23. Bxg6 {
Another metamorphosis - and another critical position, in which Black has to
resolve the question regarding the advisability of exchanging the dark-square
bishops.} Bf8 $2 ({'In the press centre} 23... Bf6 $5 {was studied, retaining
the bishop in order to cover the a1-h8 diagonal.' (Averbakh). And indeed, this
would have been much stronger! After} 24. Be4 Kh8 $1 {Black would not have
allowed the rapid switching of the rook to g3, he would have been the first to
occupy the g-file, and thanks to his powerful bishop on d5 he could have hoped
for counterplay, partly compensating for his pawn weaknesses. For example:} 25.
Rd2 Rg8 26. Rde2 Qf7 27. Bf4 Rad8 28. Bg3 Bd4 29. Kh1 e5 30. Bh2 Rg5 31. f3 {
, and although White is a little better (in some he cases he is threatening to
exchange on d5 with pressure on the e-file), it is clear that his advantage is
insignificant. --- However, to decide definitely at the board that 23...Bf6 is
stronger than 23...Bf8 is possible only with a clear head, without it coming
on the back of five months of tiring struggle (although it is not certain that
23...Bf6 would have been made also at the start of the match).}) 24. Bxf8 Rxf8
{This position seemed perfectly defensible to Karpov. He assumed that, with
his powerful bishop on d5, Black would place his rooks on g7 and f8 and would
feel comparatively safe.} 25. Be4 Rf7 ({'} 25... Rf4 26. Re3 Kh8 {was better' 
(Taimanov). With the possible sequel} 27. Rde1 Rg8 28. g3 Qg7 {, although the
position would still have remained favourable for White:} 29. Bxd5 $1 exd5 30.
Re7 Rf7 31. Rxf7 Qxf7 32. Qc3+ Qg7 33. Re5 $1 {, planning Kh2, f2-f4, g3-g4
and so on.}) 26. Re3 Rg7 27. Rdd3 $1 {'An unusual attack with the heavy pieces,
making use of the 3rd rank' (Tal). I regard it as a great creative achievement
on my part. I was able to set up an unusual rook pendulum and to break up
Black's position, by combining threats on the g- and e-files (even if this
involved the exchange on d5, ridding Black of his weak e6-pawn).} Rf8 {The
natural reply.} ({Little is changed by} 27... Qc7 28. Bxd5 exd5 29. Rg3) ({or} 
27... Qf7 28. Rf3 Qe7 (28... Rxg2+ $2 29. Kf1 $1 {and wins}) 29. Rde3 {, when
if White does not find a way to achieve a direct attack on the king, he can
build up his positional advantage on the queenside (say,} Re8 30. Qc3 Qc7 31.
b4 {etc.), and Black faces the prospect of a difficult ending.}) 28. Rg3 $1 Kh8
{Since Bxh7+ was threatened.} 29. Qc3 Rff7 (29... Rf4 {was no better.} 30. -- (
{. Now the showy} 30. Rg5 $6 {(with the idea of 30...Rxe4? 31 Rdg3!) merely
hinders the attack in view of} Rff7 31. Re3 Kg8 {.}) ({. The correct
continuation is} 30. Bxd5 $1 exd5 31. Qe5 {(a very unpleasant pin)} Rf8 32.
Rdf3 Rfg8 33. b4 $1 Qe8 34. Qd4 {, and Black loses immediately after} Qe4 $2 ({
or} 34... h6 $2 35. Rf6 $1 Kh7 36. Qh4) ({so he is forced to wait -} 34... Qd7
{, but then} 35. h4 Qe8 36. Kf1 {, and White should win}) 35. Qxg7+ {.})) 30.
Rde3 {Probing the main defect in Black's position - the weakness of his
e6-pawn.} (30. h4 $5 {was more energetic, with the idea of} Kg8 ({or} 30... Qc7
31. Rde3 $1) 31. h5 {.}) 30... Kg8 ({After} 30... Qd6 $2 31. Bxd5 cxd5 (31...
exd5 $2 32. Re8+) (31... Qxd5 $2 32. Rd3) 32. Rxg7 Rxg7 {White has a pleasant
choice between a rook ending (} 33. Qc8+ ({and a queen ending} 33. Rg3 Qc7 34.
Rxg7 Qxg7 35. Qc8+ Qg8 36. Qxb7 {with an extra pawn}) 33... Rg8 34. Qxe6 Qxe6
35. Rxe6 {).}) 31. Qe5 Qc7 {The correct decision from a practical point of
view.} ({Recognising the futility of passive defence (for example,} 31... Qc8
32. b4 Qf8 33. a4 $5 Qd8 34. a5 {etc.), Karpov gives up a pawn, but simplifies
the position in the hope, after the slightest inaccuracy by his opponent, of
obtaining saving counterplay in a rook endgame.}) 32. Rxg7+ Rxg7 33. Bxd5 Qxe5
34. Bxe6+ Qxe6 35. Rxe6 {'The game has transposed into a won ending for White:
subsequently he will create a pair of passed pawns on the kingside, and Black
has no way of opposing this.' (Averbakh)} Rd7 {Black stakes his claim for
counterplay.} 36. b4 ({But perhaps I should have preferred} 36. Re2 {(Averbakh)
}) ({or} 36. g4 $5 Kg7 37. Re3 {, 'opening a route for the king to the centre'
(Taimanov).}) 36... Kf7 37. Re3 Rd1+ ({(if} 37... Rd5 {, then} 38. g4 a5 39.
bxa5 Rxa5 40. Rb3 {is good)}) 38. Kh2 Rc1 $1 39. g4 b5 {Karpov has
nevertheless found a counter-chance: Black prepares ...c6-c5.} 40. f4 ({In
Taimanov's opinion, '} 40. Re5 Rc3 41. Kg2 {came into consideration} -- ({,
with the idea of} 41... Rxa3 42. Rc5 {.'}) ({. But after} 41... c5 $1 {the
position becomes unclear and White is in danger of throwing away the win, both
in the rook ending -} 42. bxc5 ({and in the queen ending -} 42. Rxc5 Rxc5 43.
bxc5 a5 44. f4 b4 45. axb4 axb4 46. c6 Ke8 47. f5 b3 48. c7 Kd7 49. f6 b2 50.
f7 b1=Q 51. f8=Q Kxc7 {etc.}) 42... Rxa3 {.})) ({A sensible alternative to the
move in the game was} 40. Kg3 c5 41. bxc5 Rxc5 42. Kf4 Rc2 43. f3 $1 Rh2 44.
Kg3 Rb2 45. h4 a5 {, and here White decides matters with either} 46. Re5 ({or} 
46. Kf4 b4 47. axb4 Rxb4+ 48. Re4 Rb3 49. Ra4 Rb5 50. Ke4) 46... a4 47. Rf5+ $1
Kg7 48. Rc5 {.}) 40... c5 41. bxc5 {The sealed move.} Rxc5 {Home analysis
enabled me to find the best way, in my view, for White to convert his
advantage. Only in one place (on the 53rd move) was there a dual solution, but
it is not certain that the winning path rejected by me was simpler and clearer.
--- The adjournment session proceeded 'without any excesses' and the game
concluded quite logically, although some Soviet chess experts hastened to
report to the authorities that because of extreme fatigue both players had
supposedly made serious mistakes.} 42. Rd3 {'An important subtlety. By the
threat of 43 Rd7+ White draws the enemy king away from the kingside.' 
(Averbakh)} Ke7 43. Kg3 a5 44. Kf3 $1 ({Play on the kingside alone does not
produce a win:} 44. Kh4 b4 45. axb4 axb4 46. f5 Rb5 $1 47. Rb3 Kf6 48. Kh5 Rb8
49. Kh6 Rb7 50. h4 Ke5) ({or, in a different modification,} 44. g5 b4 45. axb4
axb4 46. Kg4 Rb5 $1 {, also forcing} 47. Rb3 {and gaining a draw after} Ke6 48.
h4 Kf7 49. f5 Kg7 50. h5 Rb7 {.}) 44... b4 {There is nothing else.} 45. axb4
axb4 46. Ke4 {In pursuit of the b4-pawn.} Rb5 47. Rb3 Rb8 48. Kd5 Kf6 ({'Black
would also have lost in the event of} 48... h5 49. Kc5 hxg4 50. hxg4 Rg8 51. g5
Ke6 52. Rxb4 {' (Averbakh). For example:} Kf5 53. Kd6 Re8 54. Kd7 Re1 55. Rd4
$1 {, reducing matters to a theoretically won position discovered by Chéron 
(1926), which is analysed in detail in books on the endgame (for example, in
'Comprehensive Chess Endings' by the same Averbakh). --- Karpov quite
reasonably assumed that in their adjournment analysis the opponent's team
would have studied this possibility (which was in fact so; moreover, I cannot
say that the win here for White is really very difficult), and therefore he
decided to avoid Chéron's position, in order to set me non-standard problems -
the best hope from the practical point of view.}) 49. Kc5 Re8 50. Rxb4 Re3 51.
h4 Rh3 ({The blockade by} 51... h5 52. Rb6+ Kg7 53. g5 Rf3 54. Rf6 Rh3 {did
not work on account of} 55. f5 Rxh4 56. Rh6 Rg4 57. f6+ $1 ({only not} 57. Rxh5
$2 Rg1 {- this is a draw.})) 52. h5 Rh4 {This is the point of Karpov's idea:
this position is not in the books. I stopped to think...} 53. f5 ({Many
criticised this move, reckoning that the goal would have been quickly reached
by} 53. g5+ Kf5 54. h6 Rh1 55. Kd6 Re1 ({or} 55... Ra1 56. Ke7 Ra6 $1 57. Kf7
Rg6 58. Rd4 Kg4 $1 59. Ke7 $1 Ra6 60. Rd6 $1 {etc.}) 56. Rb8 $1 Kxf4 57. g6 $1
hxg6 58. h7 Rh1 59. h8=Q Rxh8 60. Rxh8 g5 61. Kd5 {(Averbakh). --- I have to
admit that at the board I did not notice this idea (with 56 Rb8!), since I was
completely focused on 53 f5 and I had seen a clear winning plan using a
by-passing king manoeuvre. Here the win for White is merely a matter of time.
It may be more complicated than 53 g5+, but the game concluded quite quickly.})
53... Rh1 54. Kd5 Rd1+ 55. Rd4 Re1 56. Kd6 {In reply to the activation of the
black rook, White has activated his king.} Re8 ({If} 56... Rg1 {White advances
his king and his h-pawn, and then carries out the same manoeuvre:} 57. Kd7 Kf7
58. Kd8 Rg2 59. h6 $1 Kf8 60. Kc7 $1 {(Taimanov)} Rc2+ ({or} 60... Kf7 61. Rd7+
Kg8 62. Rg7+ Kh8 63. Re7 $1 Kg8 64. Kd6 Rxg4 65. Ke6 {, winning}) 61. Kd6 {,
and since the black king has stepped back, if} Rg2 {, there is} ({and if} 61...
Re2 {-} 62. g5) 62. Ke6 {. Karpov again took a practical decision - he cut
off the white king from the 8th rank and played his rook to g8 for an attack
on the g4-pawn. But this too proved insufficient.}) 57. Kd7 Rg8 58. h6 $1 Kf7
59. Rc4 Kf6 60. Re4 {Black is forced to allow the rook to go to g7.} Kf7 61.
Kd6 Kf6 62. Re6+ Kf7 (62... Kg5 63. f6 {.}) 63. Re7+ Kf6 64. Rg7 $1 Rd8+ 65.
Kc5 Rd5+ {The last chance, but the rook quickly runs out of checks.} 66. Kc4
Rd4+ 67. Kc3 ({After} 67. Kc3 Ra4 68. Kd3 {the king goes to g3. --- Times: 3.
53-3.23.}) (67. Kc3 {. 5-3! After this there followed another week-long break:
at first (11th February) I claimed a time-out, and then (13th February) FIDE
President Campomanes announced one, in order to make his 'move' the next day.
--- My third win was the culmination of the entire encounter. I think that the
48th game was not only my best over the five months' play, but was also in
general the best in the match. It was full of instructive moments, of clashes
between attack and defence. In all its phases there was a tense, interesting
struggle, without blunders such as those that were the cause of my defeats. It
is hard to find a move by Karpov which definitely deserves a question mark,
and it is well known that the quality of a win is best judged by the standard
of play by the loser and the number of interesting ideas demonstrated by the
winner (by these criteria the second best game was the 32nd).} -- {It would
appear that after the 48th game Karpov was completely devastated and not ready
to continue the match. Both the result and the course of the game itself put
the champion and his circle in a very pessimistic mood. It was not so much a
question of his physical fatigue, but rather the psychological disaster. The
score had now become 5-3 (it was once 5-0!), but the main thing was that
Karpov had completely lost the match initiative. He was experiencing
increasingly perceptible opening problems, while the last game had shown that
his young opponent had already learned much and was capable of outplaying the
champion in positional style. Continuing to play was fraught with the most
unpleasant consequences for Karpov. --- Later I became convinced that the
decision to stop the match was carried out not so much because of any risk to
the champion's health, but rather in view of his psychological exhaustion,
confusion, and fear of continuing. No other way of retaining his title was now
apparent: had Karpov also lost a fourth game, the only way to complete the
match would have been in accordance with the regulations. And the powers which
at that time controlled Soviet sport, including chess, decided not to take the
risk... --- On 15th February the unprecedented '49th game' of Campomanes took
place: the FIDE President terminated the match 'without a final result' and
announced that a new match would begin on 1st September 1985 with the score
0-0.}) 1-0

