Master Preparation-Fall 1996

Lesson 4. Strategic ideas in piece-pawn centers I:
The problem of the fianchetto bishop in Marocy-like systems

Lecture by UMBC Chess Coach Igor Epshteyn

The piece and pawn center structure (Marocy-like - by the name of variant of Dragon system in Sicilian Defense) is characterized by pawns c4 and e4 with half open file 'd' from White side, and pawns d6 and e7 and half open file 'c' from Black side. This structure can arise from Sicilian, King-Indian Defense, Ben-Ony,

Pirc-Ufimtsev, English opening(reversed). Very close to this type of positions are ones with Black pawn on c7 and open 'e' file that can arise from King-Indian and some systems of open openings like Spanish and Four Knights(non-Marocy), that in spite of the difference in structure has sufficient influence on the upper mentioned problem. That is why in this lecture we stress on Marocy-like positions and will make notes about similar ideas in another one if exists.

Both type of positions are also characterized by king flank fianchetto bishop that means that king side bishop developed on the long diagonal. The value of this bishop arises when:

  1. White castles to the long side and Black to the short. In this case for Marocy-like system fianchetto bishop combines defense duties of own king with targeting the position of enemy king.

  2. For non-Marocy systems with the different side castle but with pawn on e5(long diagonal is closed),'bad' fianchetto bishop is also valuable as defender when many pieces on a board and king's attack is most obvious plan(like King-Indian Zemish).

  3. For Marocy-like systems fianchetto bishop is also vitally important when both sides castled to the same king's flank, but plan for king's attack from White is expected(majority of pieces is on the board).

  4. For the both types of systems fianchetto bishop is important when White can conceive an operations in center that can be sufficiently effected by fianchetto bishop(black square operations or white square if reversed).

The fianchetto bishop looses the value if:

  1. King side attack is not a reality because of exchange of most of minor pieces.

  2. White provided typical plan of pieces replacement to the center and king side and there are no targets on long diagonal for it.

  3. Both sides made short castle and providing the plans of pawn advancing on queenside. In this case black-square White bishop can support to the plan more effective than fianchetto bishop.

  4. Fianchetto bishop can sometimes be very effectively exchanged for the knight on c3(c6 for reverse position), damaging the pawn structure, if in this case one can avoid (or fade) king's attack and create stacked pawn chains which devaluate the bishops in favor of the knights(see the game Botvinnik-Goldenov). Game #1 Botvinnik-Goldenov is exposition on the theme: real and imaginary weaknesses. In this reversed Marocy-like structure White(Botvinnik) voluntarily exchanged their 'good' fianchetto bishop for the knight but created damaged and idle pawn structure. At this time the weaknesses of white square on the king side were not as important as positional advantages because the king was not castled yet. white managed to castle to another(long) side and made this weaknesses imaginary. Then they blocked the Black pawns on center from king side with dare move e4 creating second imaginary weakness on d3.Black missed an opportunity for resistance playing on template way (move the knight on d5 instead of d4). After complications white technically perfect transformed of their positional advantage in instructive king's attack.

  5. The second game is real masterpiece of 9th world champion T. Petrosian, in which fianchetto bishop was exchanged in right moment. In this game also was demonstrated imaginary strength of aggressively placed but non-cohesive(not supportive for the real plan) White pieces that was refuted by fine positional precise play.

    Game 1: Keres-Petrosian (Bled, 1959, Candidate's Tournament)

    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 d6
    11. Be2 Bd7
    12. 0-0 0-0
    13. Rac1 Bc6
    14. Rfd1 Nc5
    15. f3 a5
    16. b3 Qb6
    17. Nb5 Rfc8
    18. Bf1 Qd8
    19. Qf2 Qe8
    20. Nc3 b6
    21. Rc2 Qf8
    22. Qd2 Bd7
    23. Nd5 Rab8
    24. Bg5 Re8
    25. Re1 Rb7
    26. Qf2 Bc6
    27. Qh4 f6
    28. Be3 e6
    29. Nc3 Rd7
    30. Bd4 f5
    31. exf5 gxf5
    32. Rd2 Bxd4
    33. Rxd4 Rg7
    34. Kh1 Rg6
    35. Rd2 Rd8
    36. Red1 Rd7
    37. Qf2 Qd8
    38. Qe3 e5
    39. f4 e4
    40. Ne2 Rdg7
    41. Nd4 Bd7
    42. a3 Qa8
    43. Kg1 h5
    44. Rb1 h4
    45. Rbb2 Rg4
    46. Rf2 Qd8
    47. b4 Rg3
    48. hxg3 hxg3
    49. Rfd2 Qh4
    50. Be2 Rh7
    51. Kf1 Qxf4
    0-1


    Game 2: Botvinnik-Goldenov (Moscow, 1952, 20th USSR Championship)

    1. c4 e6
    2. g3 d5
    3. Bg2 dxc4
    4. Qa4 Qd7
    5. Qxc4 c5
    6. Na3 Nc6
    7. Qb5 a6
    8. Bxc6 bxc6
    9. Qa4 Rb8
    10. Nf3 f6
    11. d3 Ne7
    12. Nc4 e5
    13. Bd2 Nd5
    14. Ba5 Be7
    15. e4 Nb4
    16. 0-0-0 Qg4
    17. Ne1 Bd7
    18. a3 Nd5
    19. Qc2 Rb5
    20. f3 Qe6
    21. Ng2 0-0
    22. Rhe1 Rfb8
    23. f4 Bf8
    24. fxe5 fxe5
    25. exd5 cxd5
    26. Nf4 Qh6
    27. Rxe5 dxc4
    28. Rh5 Qf6
    29. Bc3 Qf7
    30. dxc4 g6
    White resigned after 35 moves


    Homework 1 (Position 1): Botvinnik-Goldenov (Moscow, 1952, 20th USSR Championship)

    Position from Game 2 after White's 15th move:

    Questions:

    1. Identify all weaknesses in the pawn structure for each side. Which of these weaknesses are real, and which are imaginary?
    2. How would you complete Botvinnik's attack after move 30?

    Homework 2 (Game 3):
    M. Stangl-V. Korchnoi (Garmish-Partenkirchen, 1994)

    1. c4 c5
    2. Nf3 g6
    3. d4 cxd4
    4. Nxd4 Nc6
    5. e4 Nf6
    6. Nc3 d6
    7. Nc2 Bg7
    8. Be2 Nd7
    9. 0-0 Bxc3
    10. bxc3 Nc5
    11. f3 Qa5
    12. Qe1 Be6
    13. Bh6 Na4
    14. Bg7 Rg8
    15. Bd4 0-0-0
    16. Nb4 Kb8
    17. f4 Nxd4
    18. cxd4 Qb6
    19. Qd2 Ka8
    20. f5 gxf5
    21. exf5 Bc8
    22. Nd5 Qc6
    23. Bf3 Qd7
    24. Rab1 e6
    25. Nf6 Qc7
    26. Nxg8 Rxg8
    27. Rfc1 e5
    28. Qb4 Qd7
    29. c5 dxc5
    30. dxc5 Qd4
    31. Kh1 Kb8
    32. Rc4
    1-0

    Questions:

    1. Comment on Black's 12th move Be6. What is Black's plan? Is this move consistent with this plan?
    2. Comment on Black's 13th move Na4. Design possible plans for Black.
    3. Find an opportunity for Black resistance after White's 17th move f4.
    4. Comment on Black's 18th move Qb6.