67. The Refutation of the King’s Gambit – Part 7

[Event "?"] [Site "?"] [Date "2020.07.31"] [Round "?"] [White "King's Gambit"] [Black "Schallopp Variation"] [Result "*"] [ECO "C36"] [Annotator "Wahls"] [PlyCount "68"] [SourceVersionDate "2002.05.06"]

1. e4 e5 2. f4 exf4 3. Nf3 Nf6 4. Nc3 {Although this move is by no means worse
than 4.e5, it appears to pose less practical problems to Black.} d5 $1 {
[#] We are now dealing with an improved version of the line 2.f4 exf4 3.Nf3 d5.
} 5. exd5 (5. e5 $2 Nh5 $1 (5... Ne4 $15) 6. d4 Nc6 7. Be2 (7. Bb5 a6 $146 8.
Ba4 (8. Bxc6+ bxc6 9. O-O g5 $17) 8... Be6 9. Qe2 b5 10. Bb3 Be7 $17) 7... g5
8. Nxg5 Qxg5 9. Bxh5 Qh4+ 10. Kf1 Be6 11. Bf3 f6 $17 {½-½ (30) Pirisi,G
(2288)-Borisek,J (2258) Budapest 2001}) 5... Nxd5 {Now, White has to decide
between a) 6.Nxd5, 6.Bb5+ and c) 6.Bc4.} {a)} 6. Nxd5 $6 {This is by far the
most common move, but it's quality is doubtful.} Qxd5 7. d4 Be7 {Again, White
has a choice: a1) 8.c4, a2) 8.Ld3 and a3) 8.Le2.} {a1)} 8. c4 {Chasing the
queen away from her central position is logical but comes with the price of creating
weaknesses. [#]} Qd6 $1 {This is clearly the best of 7 queen moves, which have
been tried here.} 9. c5 (9. Qd2 g5 $146 {There is no reason for abandoning the
pawn.} (9... c5 $2 {0-1 (29) Hector,J (2497)-Smith,A (2505) Stockholm 2017})
10. Be2 (10. h4 g4 11. Ne5 f6 12. Nd3 Qxd4 13. Nxf4 Nc6 $17) 10... Bf6 11. h4
g4 12. Ne5 Nc6 $17) (9. Be2 O-O 10. O-O (10. Qd2 Nc6 11. d5 Ne5 12. Nxe5 Qxe5
13. Qxf4 Bb4+ 14. Kd1 Qe7 $17 {Leaving White's king in the cross-hairs.})
10... g5 11. Kh1 h6 $146 (11... Nc6 $2 {1/2-1/2 (39) Okulov,A (2284)-Sultanov,
D (2155) Ufa 2004}) 12. Bd2 Bf6 $17) (9. Bd3 g5 10. O-O (10. Qe2 Bg4 11. Bd2
Nc6 12. Bc3 O-O-O 13. O-O-O Bf6 $17 {0-1 (31) Reti,R-Brinckmann,A Kiel 1921})
10... Bg4 $146 (10... g4 $2 {1/2-1/2 (21) Seidel,M-Joutsi,J DESC email 2005}
11. Kh1 $1 gxf3 12. Qxf3 $15) 11. Bd2 Nc6 12. d5 O-O-O 13. Bc3 Bxf3 14. Qxf3
Ne5 15. Qe4 Rhe8 $17 {z.B.} 16. Bxe5 $2 Qxe5 17. Qxe5 Bc5+ 18. Kh1 Rxe5 19.
Rae1 Be3 20. Bxh7 $2 Rh8 21. Bc2 Rh4 $19 {followed by g4}) 9... Qf6 (9... Qd5
$2 10. Qb3 $15 {1/2-1/2 (60) Kutsak,Y-Maksutov,S (2235) ICCF email 2011}) 10.
Qd2 (10. Bb5+ $2 Bd7 11. Qb3 $2 (11. Qa4 a6 12. Bxd7+ Nxd7 13. Bd2 O-O-O $17)
11... Nc6 $1 $146 (11... O-O $2 $17 {0-1 (41) Herzog,K-Janosi,E LSS email 2007}
) 12. d5 {Forced, but now the c-pawn is in danger.} Nb8 13. Qc4 O-O 14. O-O
Bxb5 15. Qxb5 Qa6 $1 16. Qxa6 Bxc5+ $19) 10... Bg4 $1 {Returning the windfall
profits from move 2 is a permanent background theme, as we already know. Black
wants to reduce the tension by exchanging queens, so he can focus on besieging
White's weak d-pawn.[#]} (10... g5 $2 11. b3 $1 Be6 12. Bb2 Bd5 13. Bc4 $15)
11. Ne5 (11. Qxf4 $2 Bxf3 12. gxf3 Nc6 $17) 11... Be6 12. Qxf4 O-O (12... Nd7
$5 13. Nxd7 Kxd7 14. Be2 Rad8 15. Qf2 (15. O-O Kc8 16. Rd1 Rd7 $17) 15... Kc8
16. Be3 Qxf2+ 17. Kxf2 f5 18. Rhe1 Bf6 19. Bf3 Bf7 20. Rad1 g5 $17) 13. Bd3 (
13. Be2 Rd8 14. O-O Qxf4 15. Rxf4 Nd7 16. c6 Nxe5 17. cxb7 Rab8 18. dxe5 Rxb7
$17 {intending 19..Lc5 20.Kh1 Ld4 0-1 (36) Kutsak,Y-Duplenko,V (2322) ICCF
email 2011}) 13... Rd8 14. Be4 Bd5 15. O-O Qxf4 16. Rxf4 {[#] There go White's
swindle chances.} a5 (16... f6 $146 17. Nf3 Nc6 $17 {might be easier.}) 17.
Bd2 Bxe4 18. Rxe4 Bxc5 19. dxc5 Rxd2 20. Nc4 Rd8 21. Re7 Na6 22. Nxa5 Kf8 23.
Re5 Nb4 24. Nxb7 Rd2 25. c6 {The threat was 25..Nc6, trapping White's knight.}
Rxb2 $17 {[#]} ({After} 25... Nxc6 $2 26. Rc5 {Black lost quite some portion
of his advantage. ½-½ (39) Binder,E (2131)-Morelli,A (2263) ICCF email 2013})
26. Nc5 Nxc6 27. Nd7+ Kg8 28. Rc5 Nb4 29. Rxc7 Nd5 30. Rcc1 f6 31. g3 (31. a4
Rd8 32. Nc5 Ne3 33. Kh1 Nxg2 $17 {exposes White's king to a potential attack.})
31... Ne3 32. Nc5 Rg2+ 33. Kh1 Rgxa2 34. Rxa2 Rxa2 $17 {[#] Our final position leaves Black with practical chances and White will have to suffer for a while in any case.} *

Recent Posts