Bakharev V vs Volzhin Alexander (RUS) (2370)
? | Kazan (Russia) | Round 2
316582
[Event "?"] [Site "Kazan (Russia)"] [Round "2"] [White "Bakharev V"] [Black "Volzhin Alexander (RUS)"] [Result "0-1"] [BlackElo "2370"] [ECO "C70"] [Opening "Spanish: 4.Ba4"] 1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.Bb5 a6 4.Ba4 Nf6 5.Qe2 Be7 6.O-O b5 7.Bb3 O-O 8.c3 d5 { The variation with ?e2 was revived after the match Short - Karpov, Linares 1992. Black did not cope sufficiently with his opening problems then. Another continuation is possible for Black - 8... d6 with play in the spirit of the Chigorin variation. } 9.exd5 { !? Better is 9. d3, as Short actually played in the aforementioned match. White's ideas are well illustrated by the game Short - Huebner, Manila(izt) 1990 as well. } 9...e4 { 9... ?g4!? 10. h3 ?f3 11. ?f3 e4 12. ?e2 ?a5 13. ?c2 ?d5 14. ?e1 ?ae8 15. ?e4 ?e4 16. ?e4 ?d8? Hjorth - Keres, Lidkoping 1944. } ( 9...Bg4 { !? } 10.h3 Bxf3 11.Qxf3 e4 12.Qe2 Na5 13.Bc2 Qxd5 14.Re1 Rae8 15.Bxe4 Nxe4 16.Qxe4 Qd8 { ? } ) 10.Ng5 { The continuation 10. dc ?g4 11. d4 ef 12. gf ?h5 (12... ?h3!?) 13. ?f4 ?e8 gave Black a strong attack for the sacrificed material in Foltyc - Keres, Salzburg 1943. Amazingly, Black can transpose to one of the variation of the Marshall attack by 10... ef 11. ?f3, but with the rook on f1. This difference seems to be better for White (!) as the rook on e1 might be attacked (?e8). } 10...Bg4 11.f3 exf3 12.Nxf3 ( 12.gxf3 { !? } 12...Nxd5 13.Nxf7 { ! ? } ) 12...Nxd5 { It is possible to draw some conclusions: Black has an advantage in development and an initiative, plus it is difficult for White to complete the development of his Q-side. } 13.Qe4 ( 13.d4 Re8 { !? } ) 13...Be6 14.d4 Na5 15.Bc2 g6 ( 15...Nf6 16.Qh4 { ? } ) 16.Ne5 c5 17.Bh6 Re8 18.dxc5 { ? The last moves of both players were forced. With the text move White makes t the decisive mistake, after which Black's initiative progresses without obstacles. Better for White would be 18. ?d2 ?f6?. } 18...Bxc5+ 19.Kh1 Nc4 { ! } 20.Nxc4 Nf6 { !! } 21.Qh4 { In all variations, White is ruined because of the weakness of the back rank. } 21...Bxc4 22.Rd1 Qb6 23.Na3 ( 23.Nd2 Be2 24.Re1 Bf2 { ??+ } ) 23...Be2 24.Rd2 Bf2 25.Qh3 Bg4 26.Qd3 Rad8 { Also 26... ?e4 would be winning after which White is compelled to give his queen away. } 27.Qf1 Rxd2 28.Bxd2 Be2 29.Qc1 Ng4 { The black bishops dominate the board, and the white king is defenceless. } 30.h3 Ne3 31.Bxe3 Rxe3 { There is no defence against 32... ?h3. } {#R} 0-1
0-1
Loading embedded game viewer...