von Hennig-Schara Gambit Part II (with 9.Qd1)
In my previous blog on this opening with the title, von Hennig-Schara Gambit with 9.Qb3, I was playing in Speedmatch II and enjoyed an excellent result. The organizer RUBENGAR46100 hosted another one called Fast Action III with almost the same set of players participating. I played once again the Hennig-Schara Gambit against my very worthy opponent CarvinSharp. I remember telling Carvin after our first game that better is 9.Qd1.
This time Carvin used 9.Qd1 and I feel guilty to beat him in only 19 moves after following what I had recommended. However I also sent him FM Erick Schiller's article in this opening that probably he had not had the time to review.
Below is our game. After our game is an article by Tim Harding on the von Hennig-Schara Gambit appearing on the Kibitzer .
I am now playing Team Vote Chess with Old School and Gambit Lines. I encourage my friends to join Old School and Gambit Lines where views from everyone are heard and where a member is also a leader. There are team captains who moderate discussions well. Every move is openly analyzed and questions are properly entertained. I will be happy to see my friends from all the groups that we meet at Old School and Gambit Lines and continue the fun in TVC.
The Kibitzer by Tim Harding Source:http://www.chesscafe.com/text/kibitz38.txt Hennig-Schara Gambit Revisited THIS MONTH'S COLUMN is a follow-up, in response to reader requests, to last month's article on the Hennig-Schara Counter-Gambit1 d4 d5 2 c4 e6 3 Nc3 c5 4 cxd5 cxd4!?, (ECO code D32). If you didn't read that yet, you can find it in the The Chess Cafe Archives. (See Diagram) To summarise what we have learned so far, this is an interesting pawn sacrifice which usually leads to White coming under pressure if he castles kingside. No clear refutation is demonstrable and theory suggests that the slight advantage White may get in the main lines is no greater than he is likely to achieve in the quieter lines of the Tarrasch Defence proper (4...exd5) or the orthodox Queen's Gambit. On top of which, the risks for White are much greater: the penalty for blunders or ignorance of theory tends to be high and Black wins quite a high proportion of games, often quickly. Last month's column included two correspondence games won in combinative style by Russian master Boris Mikhailovich Shkurovich- Khazin. This player always likes to play in an attacking style, especially with Black, and he should not be confused with Abram Khasin, the FIDE IM and correspondence GM from Moscow, whose style is somewhat different. Shkurovich-Khazin published a very enjoyable little autobiography in 1997 under the title "Kombinatsiya - shakhmat bolshevstvo" ('Combinations - magical chess'), which is full of pretty finishes and clever ideas in sidelines of gambits. The Two Knights Defence and Spanish Marshall Attack feature among these. At the back there are many positions on which you can test your own powers of vision and analysis. Shkurovich-Khazin has played this gambit with 4...cxd4 not only in correspondence tournaments but also in over-the-board events in Russia, and in a simultaneous display against the great Viktor Korchnoi, played in Leningrad in January 1970. This was a few years before Korchnoi's defection to the west when he was already in the top 10 players in the world. Korchnoi-Shkurovich-Khazin Simultaneous display, Leningrad, 1970 1 d4 d5 2 c4 e6 3 Nc3 c5 4 cxd5 cxd4 5 Qxd4 Nc6 6 Qd1 exd5 7 Qxd5 7 Nxd5 Be6 8 e4 Bxd5 was analysed in the June Kibitzer. Here is an example of Black's alternative8...Nf6!? 9 Nxf6+ Qxf6 10 Nf3 Bb4+ 11 Bd2 Rd8 12 Qc2 Bxd2+ 13 Nxd2 0 0 14 a3 Nd4 15 Qb1 Qf4! 16 b4 Rc8 17 Bd3 Rfd8 18 Qb2 (See Diagram) Now Black finished off prettily by 18...Nc2+! 19 Ke2 Rxd3!! 20 Kxd3 Rd8+ 21 Kxc2 Rxd2+ 22 Kc3 Rxb2 23 Kxb2 Bc4! 0 1 Kalyamin- Shkurovich- Khazin, St Petersburg 1992. Returning to the normal 7 Qxd5, as played by Korchnoi, the game continued 7...Bd7 8 e3 Nf6 9 Qb3!? This used to be considered an inferior move but it seems to have attracted much attention in recent years. It's interesting to note that Karpov has played it in a tournament game. When Kasparov had to meet the Hennig-Schara in a simul, he played the regular move, 9 Qd1, as we shall see later. (See Diagram) 9...Bc5 I wrote last month that after 9 Qb3 Be6! Black gets good compensation for his pawn, but I am not certain now that this assessment is right and 9...Bc5 has usually been preferred in practice. There are other possibilities too, such as 9...Bb4 to be followed by ...Be6. However, 9...Be6 is certainly interesting. Play can go 10 Qxb7 Nb4 11 Nd4 Rb8 12 Qxa7 Ra8 13 Qb7 Rb8 with a possible draw by repetition of moves (perpetual attack on the queen). So if White wants to play for a win, he will choose 10 Qa4, e.g., 11 e3 0-0 12 Be2 a6 13 0-0 b5 14 Qc2 (probably better than 14 Qh4 as in Van der Sterren-Kuijf, Dutch ch 1987) and now 14...Rc8 15 Ng5 led to a White win in Hort-Cuartas, Dortmund 1982, but this needs more examination; Hort was by far the stronger of the two players and maybe Black missed something. One suggestion is 14...Nb4 but then after 15 Qb1 h6 16 Bd2 Bg4 17 Rd1 Qe7 18 a3 Konikowski prefers White. However, there is another possibility for Black after 10 Qa4. Anastasian- Nadanian, Panormo (Greece) 1998, went10...a6 (logical) 11 Ne5 Rc8 12 a3 b5 13 Nxc6 Rxc6 14 Qd1 Qc7 15 g3 Rd6 16 Qc2 Qc6 17 e4 Rd7 18 Bg5 Be7 19 Be2 Bh3 20 Rc1 0-0 21 Bf1 Qe6 22 Bxh3 Qxh3 23 f3 Re8 and the fact that White cannot castle causes him long-term troubles that compensate Black for the pawn sacrifice. Nadanian won on time in a roughly level but complicated position at move 38. 10 Nf3 Perhaps this is a lazy move and 10 Bg5 could be more critical. Then after 10...0-0 White should play 11 e3 h6 12 Bxf6 Qxf6 13 Ne4 Qe7 14 Nxc5, maybe with some advantage for White according to Dutch correspondence grandmaster Ger van Perlo. He points out the trap 11 Ne4? Nxe4!! 12 Bxd8 Bxf2+ 13 Kd1 Rfxd8 when nasty things are about to happen to White's king. A postal game Pappier-Van Perlo, Lewkowitz Memorial B, 1994, was taking an interesting course (10 Bg5! 0-0) 11 Rd1 Na5 12 Qc2 Qb6 (Better than 12...Ng4 as played in Valenzuela - Sommerbauer, Elista ol 1988) 13 e3 Bg4 14 Be2 Rfc8 15 0-0 Bb4 16 Rd4 [16 h3 Bh5 17 Qd3 Bg6 18 Qb5 Bxc3!] 16...Bh5 17 Rfd1 Ne8 18 Bh4 [18 Ne5 Bxe2 19 Qxe2 f6!?] 18...Bg6 [18...Bc5 19 Rd5 Bg6 20 Qd2 Qb4 21 a3 Qb3 22 Rxc5! Rxc5 23 Nd4] 19 Bd3 Bxc3 20 bxc3 Nc4 21 Bxg6 hxg6 22 Qb3 Qxb3 23 axb3 Na5 and in spite of a pawn less, Black has sufficient counterplay according to Van Perlo. Unfortunately, a few moves later, his opponent was diagnosed with a terminal illness and the game was not completed. 10...Qe7 Black's concept in this game is much more aggressive than the plan seen in the following game from Informator 49. 10...0 0 11 Be2 Be6 12 Qa4 Qc7 13 0 0 Rad8 14 Bd2 Ng4 15 Rfd1 Bd6 16 g3 Qe7 17 Be1 f5 18 Nd5 Qf7 19 Ng5 Qh5 20 h4 Bc8 21 Nf4 Bxf4 22 Rxd8 Nxd8 23 Qxf4 Nc6 24 Qc7 1 0 Karpov-Hector, Haninge 1990. Of course, our main game was played in a simultaneous display. Presumably at normal time limits Korchnoi would have found a better plan against the coming pawn storm than is now seen. 11 Be2 g5 12 Nd5 Nxd5 13 Qxd5 g4 14 Nd2 Be6 15 Qe4 f5 16 Qa4 0 0 0 17 0 0 h5 18 Nb3 Bxb3 19 Qxb3 h4 20 Qc2 Qe5 21 a3 Bd6 22 g3 (See Diagram) 22...Kb8? This precautionary move retains a strong attack but Black could have played more strongly. Shkurovich-Khazin regrets that he didn't see 22...hxg3 23 fxg3 Rxh2!! removing the obstacles in the path of his queen. As 24 Kxh2 allows immediate checkmate, White would have to play 24 Qxf5+ Qxf5 25 Rxf5 Rxe2 when Black has an extra piece and should easily win. 23 f4 Qf6 24 Bc4 hxg3 25 hxg3 Rh3 26 Qg2 Rdh8 27 Bd5 Rh2 "At first sight, 27...Qh6 wins at once, but after 28 Qd2 Rxg3+ 29 Kf2 (29 Bg2 Qh1+ 30 Kf2 Rxg2+) 29...Qh2+ 30 Ke1 Qxd2+ 31 Bxd2 White holds on", according to Shkurovich-Khazin. 28 Qxh2 Rxh2 29 Kxh2 Qh6+ 30 Kg1 Qh3 31 Bd2 Qxg3+ 32 Bg2 Bc5 33 Rf2 Bxe3 34 Bxe3 Qxe3 35 Kf1 Nd4 36 Rd1 g3 37 Rfd2 Qxf4+ 38 Kg1 Qe3+ 39 Kh1 Qh6+ 40 Kg1 «-« (See Diagram) Here Black offered a draw, which was accepted. Korchnoi then asked "Why didn't you play 40...Qe3+ 41 Kh1 Nf3! 42 bxf3 Qxf3+ and advance the black f- and g-pawns?" to which S-K replied "I wanted a draw, like Petrosian". Early in the game, Shkurovich-Khazin said to Korchnoi" I often play the Hennig-Schara" and Korchnoi replied "I also". I was curious about this and went to look in my database and library for examples of Korchnoi employing this counter-gambit. I couldn't find a single one where he was Black - not surprising since Korchnoi is notorious for gobbling other people's pawns rather than giving up his own. Maybe in his early years he had played it? I did find one game of his played with White in a tournament a decade later; see the notes to the next game. I looked up some other famous masters in my database, too, but I couldn't find one game where Fischer, Petrosian, Spassky or Tal had been involved in a Hennig-Schara. However, somebody was brave enough to play it against Kasparov and the resulting game is of some theoretical importance. Kasparov,G (2825)-Netzer,J Simul, Colmar, 1998 1 d4 d5 2 c4 e6 3 Nc3 c5 4 cxd5 cxd4 5 Qa4+ Bd7 6 Qxd4 exd5 7 Qxd5 Nc6 Reaching the regular 5 Qxd4 line by transposition. 8 Nf3 Shkurovich-Khazin's experience with the Hennig-Schara reveals that White often plays inferior moves, either out of ignorance or in the hope of getting Black out of his preparation. For example a) 8 Bg5 Nf6 9 Qd2 h6 10 Bh4 g5 11 Bg3 Qa5 12 Bd6? 0 0 0 13 Bxf8 Rhxf8 14 0 0 0 Bf5 15 Qe1 Nd4 16 e4 Nxe4! 17 Nxe4 Qxa2! 18 Qc3+ (if 18 Nf6 Qb1+ 19 Kd2 Qxb2+ 20 Ke3 Rfe8+ 21 Nxe8 Rxe8#) 18...Nc6 19 Bd3 Bxe4 20 f3 (20 Bxe4 Qa1+ 21 Bb1 Rxd1+ 22 Kxd1 Qxb1+ +) 20...Qa1+ 21 Kc2 Qxd1+ 22 Kxd1 Rxd3+ 23 Kc2 Rxc3+ 24 Kxc3 Bg6 0 1 Kurshin-Shkurovich Khazin, Leningrad 1967. b) 8 e4 is a trap White often falls into, especially below master level. This pawn belongs on e3 to shield f2, as we shall now demonstrate with two cases. After 8...Nf6 9 Qd1 Bc5 White has unsuccessfully tried b1) 10 Bg5 Qb6 11 Qd2 0 0 0 12 Na4? Bxf2+! 13 Qxf2 Qa5+ 14 Nc3 Qxg5 15 Nf3 Qa5 16 h3 Nxe4 17 Qc2 Ng3 18 Rg1 Bf5 19 Qc1 Rhe8+ 20 Kf2 Ne4+ 21 Nxe4 Bxe4 22 Be2 Qb6+ 23 Kf1 Kb8 24 Qc3 Nb4 25 Nd2 (Now comes the decisive combination.) 25...Rxd2 26 Qxd2 Qf6+ 27 Bf3 Bd3+ 28 Kf2 Re2+ 29 Qxe2 Bxe2 30 Kxe2 Qxb2+ 31 Ke3 Nc2+ 0 1 Ershin v. Shkurovich Khazin, Leningrad 1975. b2) 10 Nf3 Qb6 11 Be3 Bxe3 12 fxe3 Qxe3+ 13 Qe2 Qb6 14 0 0 0 0 0 0 15 Nd5 Nxd5 16 exd5 Nb4 17 Qc4+ Kb8 18 Qf4+ Ka8 19 Kb1 Qg6+ 0 1 Ganev-Shkurovich Khazin, Pavlikeni 1989. White resigns because he has fallen into the famous mating pattern known as Philidor's Legacy20 Ka1 Nc2+ 21 Kb1 Na3+ 22 Ka1 Qb1+ 23 Rxb1 Nc2#. Now we return to Kasparov's game. 8...Nf6 9 Qd1 Bc5 10 e3 Qe7 (See Diagram) An important turning point which we also discussed last month when we looked at 11 Bb5 among other moves. 11 Be2 11 a3 is sometimes seen and it's interesting to see Korchnoi played this line in a master tournament (later than the simul game shown earlier). 11...0 0 0 12 Qc2 g5?! (12...Kb8! is correct as in Strand-Sabel, in the June Kibitzer.) 13 b4 g4 14 bxc5 gxf3 15 Nb5!ñ This game shows the difficulties Black gets into after queenside castling if he loses the initiative. It is aggravated by not having a dark-squared bishop and his attack is ineffectual when the white K can escape to the left wing. 15...Ne5 16 Nd6+ Kb8 17 Bb2 Bc6 18 g3 Nd5 19 0 0 0ñ f6 20 Bh3 Qc7 21 Be6 Ba4 22 Qxa4 Rxd6 23 Bxe5 fxe5 24 Qc4 Rxe6 (The knight cannot move because of Rxd6.) 25 Rxd5. White has a clear extra pawn now that minor pieces have vanished from the board. He won in the end but the sequel was unconvincing, maybe because of a time scramble (1 0 in 36 moves, Korchnoi-O.Rodriguez Vargas, Rome 1981). 11...0 0 0 12 0 0 g5 13 b4 White returns the gambit pawns to gain time and open lines. Last month's article looked at 13 Nd4 in detail and showed that Black's chances are better than is generally believed. 13...Bxb4 In Savic-Berta (June Kibitzer) we saw Black lose with 13...Be6?! but he fares no better in this game. Kasparov seems to know the most critical variations as a rule! 14 Qc2 (See Diagram) Last month's column only mentioned the unclear lines 14 Bb2 and 14 Qb3. Since Kasparov won the present game fairly easily, we must ask how can Black improve now? Well, I found five other games in my database with 14 Qc2 and Black won all of them! Statistics tend to be very unreliable in such cases, especially where master players are not involved. Do they stand up to close inspection? Let's see. 14...g4 I also found examples of 14...Rhg8, 14...Qc5 and 14...Kb8 but pushing the g-pawn seems the natural move. a) 14...Rhg8 15 Rb1 g4 16 Nd4 Nxd4 17 exd4 Bxc3 18 Qxc3+ Bc6 19 Bb5 Qd7 20 Bxc6 Qxc6 21 Qa5 Kb8 22 Bf4+ Ka8 23 Rfc1 Qa6 and Black is under pressure though he may have just enough resources to draw. In Sickles-Braun, Nassau ch 1988, White even managed to lose because he played 24 Qf5?! and later avoided a possible draw by repetition. Simply 24 Qxa6 bxa6 25 Bc7 would be in White's favour because the extra black pawn is worth nothing with the present pawn structure. Black cannot play 25...Rxd4 because of 26 Be5. b) 14...Qc5 was seen in a postal game Loch-Lang, 1989, but after 15 Bb2 Nd5 White blundered by 16 Nxg5? which loses a piece in the end after 16...Nxc3 17 Bxc3 Qxc3 18 Qxc3 Bxc3 19 Nxf7 Bxa1 20 Rxa1 Rhe8 21 Nxd8 Rxd8 and soon 0 1. No doubt Kasparov would have played a sensible move like 16 Rfc1 with some advantage to White. c) 14...Kb8 seems a sensible move but a black win with it was equally unconvincing. After 15 a3 Bd6 16 Nb5 g4 White just threw away material by 17 Nxd6?? in Caron-Rate, Val Maubuee 199017...gxf3 18 Bxf3 Qxd6 and soon 0 1. Instead White should move the knight but after 17 Nfd4 Nxd4 followed by ...Rc8 the position looks about =. 15 Nd4 15 Ne1 looks a bit passive but may be playable. A Dutch postal game went 15...h5 (15...Qe5!? could be better) 16 Nd3 Bxc3!? 17 Qxc3 Ne4 18 Qb2 h4 and 0 1 (Schouten-De Jong, corr 1989). White's position isn't resignable so he presumably withdrew or lost on time. For example 19 Rb1 threatens mate in one and after the most promising reply 19...Bf5 it is hard to decide whose chances to prefer; it could go either way in practice. 15...Nxd4? Black's rating was 1730 so it's not surprising that he goes wrong. This move fits in with White's plans far too well by stripping the black king of defenders. Pawn-grabbing should be the last thing on Black's mind here - especially against Kasparov! 15...h5 looks more like the right idea, although Kasparov would doubtless have played better than White in the following game16 Bd2 Kb8 17 Ncb5 Bxd2 18 Qxd2 Ne4 19 Qb2 g3 20 Rab1 gxf2+ 21 Kh1 Nxd4 22 Nxd4 b6 23 Nb5 h4 24 Rxf2 Nxf2+ 25 Kg1 Qxe3 0 1 K. Pastor jr-Cech, Brno 1990. Cech is a strong player so this line deserves more analysis and tests. 16 exd4 Kb8 17 Bf4+ Ka8 18 Nb5 Bxb5 19 Bxb5 Rxd4 20 Be3 Rdd8 21 Rac1 Bd6 22 Qa4 Bb8 23 Rfe1 Qd6 24 g3 h5 This attacking move comes far too late and Kasparov closes in for the kill. 25 Rc6! Qe5 26 Ra6 Rd4 Desperation. 27 Qxd4 1 0. Finally, last month I posted on my website a collection of over 200 Black wins in the gambit. These games are available in PGN and in both new and old ChessBase formats at http//www.chessmail.com/freegames.html. I have now added several more games, including all the games mentioned in these two articles and they will be there until about the middle of August when the next Kibitzer column is due to be posted.